Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> writes: > Hi, > > On 01/28/2012 05:59 AM, Michal Migurski wrote: > >> Keeping in >> mind that I am in support of the license switch, I think it's >> completely reasonable to expect a technical plan for a switch just 60 >> days in the future. > > You talk about reasonable - I talk about realistic.
It's realistic (and reasonable) to think it will take longer to figure out the deletion rules. It's not reasonable to have the deletion rule decision be delayed and not also delay the actual deletion time. The notion that deletion will not happen until 60 days after the rules are published is an entirely reasonable expectation. While there may or may not be some good coming from the CT/ODBL, it's clearly causing harm to the community, as there are a lot of upset people (including a lot of agreers). More clarity and attempt to accomodate those people will positively increase the balance of usefulness of the change minus the harm. Your point about useful effort vs arguing is quite valid. But when LWG announces: first we're going to publish tainting rules, and then after that we're going to set date - 4/1 is off the table, a lot of this arguing will stop.
pgpR6t6zhcvwW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
