On 7 July 2010 01:41, Stefan de Konink <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it would be a great idea too have a decentralized 'OSM' with > different kinds of data. Opposed to a central repository that is > unstructured and contains everything.
centralisation implies some form of illegitimate (generally top-down) power or control forcing elements to work together/follow the same path. osm is necessarily decentralised already due to the license, as are all free culture projects. there is always the option to split/fork, but the license keeps everyone honest - fear of a fork encourages all to behave and take account of other's opinions. the fact osm does keep going in one direction shows that all are generally happy with the route chosen. eric raymond wrote a good piece on this in his homesteading the noosphere essay http://catb.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/ if we fork, there is a real danger of license incompatibility, api incompatibility, etc. keep it as one, i think > Don't forget we will hit the 64bit limit, eventually. is that 18 exabytes? we're a way off yet then _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
