If a community has had a well established and agreed process running, which does not create any new data issues, why should someone outside of that community be requesting a global halt? It's not like the data is getting worse all of a sudden, right? And their work does not prevent global community from reaching a consensus on how to move forward. I suspect this discussion may take a very long time to complete, so proposing to ban various communities from doing what they have already been happily doing because somewhere else something is being discussed is strange. There are over 40,000 users editing OSM, so reaching a consensus on a fundamental topic of external DB linking might take years.
Has there ever been a global halt like this in OSM, where several people in @talk demanded a certain tag to not be (mass) edited globally? I'm totally ok if there is a process for that, but global halt does seem a bit extreme due to a relatively low impact. After all, we are discussing philosophy of the project here, not that tag X breaks half of the map renderers all of a sudden, right?
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
