Jo wrote:
> even more sorry you stopped being the lead developer of iD

For the record: the mantle of lead developer of iD passed to Tom and John immediately after SOTM-US Portland because it was wonderfully clear that their JavaScript skills are pretty much on a different planet to mine, and I was delighted to see them take up the torch.

My reluctance to continue work on OSM editing software dates from before this, as you can see if you look at the commit graphs of both proto-iD and Potlatch 2. This is why I was so keen in summer 2013 to get iD made the default instead of Potlatch 2: so that the burden of maintaining the default editor could pass to someone else and I wouldn't have to endure the shit flung at the holder of that role any more.

I think you, and others, need to consider why it's only those with the thickest skins that are prepared to work on OSM site (and, particularly, online editor) development. I am not the only one to have burned out.

You have your own views. That's fine. Your view is that "there is a problem". That is not objective truth, that is your view and it may or may not be informed by actual facts. Others may believe that the main challenge for OSM is to be welcoming enough for a million new users to contribute their local knowledge - not to provide more and more detailed methods for a diminishing number of power users to map the locations of angels on a pin, without ever being troubled by thoughts of how new users will interact with those detailed methods. That too is not objective truth, it is a view (it happens to be mine).

What is unacceptable is the relentless, harrying, dismissive, abusive manner in which you and others advance the former view over the latter. That is why we cannot retain developers.

Richard


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

Reply via email to