I agree, you don’t want to maintain an iD fork.. But it’s probably helpful to think of the “presets" as a plugin. HOT TM can embed the same iD software that OSM and everyone else uses, but with a smaller subset of presets that apply more to the work that HOT does.
Thanks, Bryan > On Mar 7, 2016, at 6:45 AM, Dale Kunce <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm totally against HOT maintaining a fork of ID. It sounds simple enough in > the beginning but will be more difficult as time goes on. > > Updating training materials is a pretty simple thing to do as we should try > and refresh them regularly anyway. > > On Mar 6, 2016 10:55 PM, "Mikel Maron" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > People, get a grip. > > There are a lot of cool ideas that have risen and re-risen in this thread. > Custom iD presets for HOT tasks, tighter coordination between training guides > and software release cycles, better management of tags across OSM. > > HOT excels in emergencies, but this isn't one. The label "unclassified road" > has changed to "minor road". This is a good thing > (https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2916 > <https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2916>) and something we can > easily get our minds around. > > -Mikel > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot> > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
