On 09/06/2020 09:01, Frederik Ramm wrote:
On 6/9/20 02:53, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:
Basically, can you please explain why do you think you should be able to
influence decisions of the iD maintainer without forking the code,
maintaining it yourself and in the end competing with iD on a level
playing field.
I think that we (the OSMF) give the independent iD project a huge
platform by making it the default editor that people are sent to when
they click "Edit" on our web page. (Would anyone go to a web site called
"ideditor.com" to edit OSM?)
Thank you, I couldn't find any "or else" in the blog post and was
wondering what that could be.
To me, OSMF wants the control of a project it hasn't developed but
turned out too successful to ignore, and to add insult to injury you are
asking the author to keep working on it by committing patches he
disagrees with.
I see several problems with it:
- It's deeply unethical. OSMF should foster the development of the OSM
ecosystem, not harass people working on it. How does this fit OSMF own
charter and CoC?
- Taking control from the original authors would slow down, if not
stall, the development of iD.
- Giving the control to a committee would steer the development in a
different direction (as in: "different from the current, good
direction"). At very least it would give an excuse for rejected ideas to
be pushed again.
Frankly, I would rather have iD hosted elsewhere and being developed
further to the benefit of a broader OSM community.
Better yet, talk to each other and come up with a workable plan. OSMF
proposal is very one-sided and disproportional, what is _OSMF_ willing
to compromise on to improve cooperation?
Bye
Ndrw
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
