I respect that, for as far as it goes. This particular issue is specifically called "no code" and for that simple reason alone does not resonate well in many minds as "good intersection with GitHub." Besides, who says a contract (license) with GitHub intersects well with OSM and its open-data / open-tools philosophy, again? You? For this case? Masses of the silent?
I hear your preference, I doubt it is "masses" either way. There might be significant numbers, though there are significant numbers of wiki authors and contributors and have been for the entirety of OSM. Wiki is not only a well-established channel, it may be one of the better or even best ones. GitHub? Mmmm, no, and while it does have its place, it is not as a direct substitution for any particular notification or documentation system (these are different, true). As for the wiki "isn't the easiest" OK, thank you for your opinion, but I continue to call it "easy." Very low bar of entry (especially as one is already an OSM volunteer), unlike GitHub which requires a separate contract (essentially, of adhesion). I don't have a secret-sauce walkie-talkie like you do (and you won't have all of mine, is the point), but we all have wiki access built into OSM. You might be tempted to say "OK, Boomer" and I'd be rightly miffed, but I'd prefer to reduce rancor and simply observe, yet again, "yes, both." Only, not a lot of people naturally gravitate to a "non code issue" as GitHub as their first go-to, the contradictory nature of that seems clear to me and many. The wiki, maybe yes, maybe no, (there is wiki, there are others) but yes should neither surprise nor annoy, nor does it. SteveA > On Dec 22, 2019, at 3:43 PM, Mario Frasca <ma...@anche.no> wrote: > one voice from the silent mass: I prefer github for such issues. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
