Hi, Tom Hughes wrote: >> Does your code take into account the plan that people should have the >> option of saying "no", "yes", and "yes and by the way all my data is >> PD anyway"? > > It implements the Foundation's relicensing plan - you'll have to discuss > the details of that with the Foundation.
Sigh. *You* obviously know whatever "plan" there is. *I* don't. I don't know whether the "plan" includes the talked-about option to support the PD dedication altarnative or not. If it doesn't, I would not even know if it doesn't do so because somebody has made a conscious decision to omit that, or if it was just left out by accident. I would not even know whom to ask about this. And you know that in asking the Foundation I would only hit a wall of silence. So I'll re-phrase. Don't tell me anything, I am just an ordinary member of OSMF and unworthy of knowing anything about their secret plans. But could you perhaps check your code and see whether you have an option in there that allows the user not only to select agree/disagree but also the third option, "agree and PD". And if such an option is not in there, could you perhaps ask those who told you to implement the plan whether or not this is by design. If they say "yes, we left that out on purpose but we don't want anybody to know at this time", then just leave it at that and I'll hit them over the head at the next AGM. But if they should say "oh, we forgot about that and yes we thing it is a good idea, let's have the feature", then just add the feature. I'm very uncomfortable standing here and asking for stuff to be programmed; I would normally commit a patch. But in this particular instance I lack (a) the source to patch and (b) a two-way communication channel with whoever made the plan you are implementing. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
