Hi, > Sorry for resurrecting this thread but i only noticed it yesterday. > Following a more stable change process would indeed be great. > It's not only about users but also about developers who wants to write > applications that somehow use osm data. As i said, the project is > already in a state where it is widely known and the data is used/modified > by many users and developers on a regular base.
I still maintain that aiming for more "professionality" or "stability" (as has been called for in this thread) at this early stage will *harm* the project rather than be good for it. Aiming for more stability with the current state of things would mean more stability of features, but also more stability of bugs, problems, errors, and shortcomings, the fixing of whose will become a much more lengthy process. Look at how fossilized big projects like Debian have become, where every slightest move requires ages just because they want to be stable, professional, respect the established user base and so on. Stability like that would be the end of OSM as we know it. I concede that it will be inevitable at some point in time. But I also firmly believe that by that time we'll have lost some of our brightest minds because they're not interested in the IT equivalent of filling out 17 forms with three copies each before something can get done. "OSM stable" will be a different project with different people. We're not there yet, and please let us not hasten getting there. We're neither stable nor professional and this is *good for us*. There may be users who would prefer a stable and professional OSM but they will either have to put up with a fast-moving project or wait until activitiy dies down to a level they can work with. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
