Is this the platform you are targeting? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_AIR
Its proprietary which makes it prone to the same fate as Flash Player. Why even consider such a move? I never use nonfree software like flash so I never tried P2. What is so special about it? Is there something hindering adding that specialness (as a plugin perhaps) to JOSM? The JOSM devs seem very helpful, supporting and have a friendly culture. I suggest letting this code die as it lures people to install nonfree and therefore dangerous software. Alternatively that you team up with your 20 mio edits-peers and port the code to something that does not require proprietary software. You did not present a single usecase that is not covered already by one of the other free software editors so I'm guessing you will have a hard time convincing your peers to team up around yet another editor, but I might be wrong. I don't care about your ROI arguments because they are based on the not outspoken premise that economics of software development is more important when making decisions than freedom, which is false IMO. If you had compared 2 free software projects like iD and JOSM that run without any proprietary code, then it might have been relevant. I suggest declining support of any software project that is or requires proprietary software to run. Cheers pangoSE PS I use 4 different editors to edit in the database: JOSM, OsmAnd, StreetComplete and rarely iD. Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net> skrev: (2 augusti 2020 10:28:22 CEST) >Skyler Hawthorne wrote: >> Sorry if this sounds harsh, but I think using any funds at all to >> continue support for a tool that 1% of editors use would be wasteful. >> Flash is, for all intents and purposes, a dead technology. This >> money is better spent on other uses. > >The entire point is to move away from a dead technology (Flash Player) >to a supported one (AIR). > >On the percentage stat, it's worth bearing in mind that the P2 project >is by a long chalk the smallest sum (€2500) of the three that OSMF is >proposing here. As a point of comparison, iD was initially developed >with a $575,000 grant from the Knight Foundation in 2012, so roughly >$646,000 now. Very conservatively estimating the cost of employing 1-2 >developers to code on iD since then, you get a development cost of >roughly €0.004 per (2020) changeset for iD vs $0.0002 for P2, which is >kind of fun. > >(I'm actually pleasantly surprised that P2 still has so many changesets >- 20 million last year, and I'm guessing high teens this year - given >how difficult it is to get Flash Player running in most browsers these >days. That suggests that P2's users are using it because they want to >do so, not because they are magically unaware of the existence of other >editors. I suspect if you could find another way of getting 20 million >edits for €2500 then we would snap your hand off.) > >Looking forward, and continuing the theme of ROI, the other benefit of >the project is that it enables development work to continue on P2. The >reason I have bid for funding for this, for the first time in 14 years >of developing editors for OpenStreetMap, is that it will take a solid >chunk of sustained work to do the AIR conversion and a bunch of other >stuff I believe will make P2 more sustainable into the future, and >there is a hard deadline for that sustained work (i.e. Flash Player >switch-off at the end of the year). It's not a project that can just be >done in evenings here and there. That enables further, unfunded >developments in the future, and in turn I hope the tradition of other >editors taking inspiration from P2 can continue - it's not for nothing >that JOSM has a Potlatch 2 style and a "Potlatch mode" for editing. > >But you are, of course, welcome to develop and put forward a project to >OSMF which you believe will have more bang for the buck. "Other uses" >is easy to type but doesn't actually mean anything until you identify >what those uses are, and crucially, find someone who is prepared to do >them. > >Richard
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
