On 1/27/2012 6:48 PM, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

Hi Mike and Graham,

 >We should not assume that contributors' acceptance of the new licence
means that they are particularly in favour of it - they may have just
accepted because it was easier than getting involved in the >argument,
and did not see it as doing any harm. From a personal point of view I
fall into that category - I have no interest in changing the licence,
but am not against it per-se, so accepted. Because I see >negligible
benefit in changing the licence, I find it very hard to justify data
loss by progressing with it.

+1 on this : this is precisely my view.

I really don't mind one way or the other about the licence, and have
kept out of it until now mostly because I have no wish to get into
arguments... but what I definitely don't want to see are large holes
appearing on the map come April 1st. I am particularly concerned about
my local patch, Hampshire, with a former mapper, almost certainly in the
top 5 Hampshire contributors, having declined the CTs. I do wonder if it
will do more harm than good to switch over.

I in fact oppose the license change. But I oppose it because of the damage it will do, so declining would be hypocritical.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to