Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote:
Hello,
I went through Pavel's changesets and I think I've found all the tainted
data. Here is what I did:
1) I went through Pavel's changesets (except the big ones already
identified as ODbL compatible imports).
2) Counted the number of created or modified
Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
So lets start by saying that I don't like ODbL and I hate CT.
There are three classes of data I uploaded to osm:
a) Hand created data, most important paths in the woods. CT+ODbL, is
okay for those.
b) ODbL compatible - mass imports. CT+ODbL is okay for
Pavel Machek wrote:
If this is that case, I personally volunteer to help track down your
changesets containing the incompatible imports.
Thanks!
The only two are the wikipedia imports of places and railway stations,
is this correct?
I think so.
Hello,
currently we're at phase 4 of Implementation Plan for ODbL and closing
on the final data cut-off.
Database currently contains the mix of ODbL+CT (in)compliant data and it
is possible to edit them all. And that's unfortunate, because when the
final cut-off is done, we lose not only data
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Or, in other words, do you have reason to believe that a three-month
only edits to non-tainted objects accepted phase would actually make
people re-map more and better compared to the phase we are in now? And
if so, why?
Can we agree on the fact, that some of the recent
