Sebastian Klein <[email protected]> writes: > Karl Guggisberg wrote: >> Hi Werner >> >> I'd say it's a JOSM *feature*, not a defect. JOSM correctly detects >> that the server wasn't able to delete a relation because it was still >> in use by some other relation. >> >>> Simple workaround: Remove 73724 first and 73723 with a second >>> changeset. >> That's how to do it. It isn't a workaround.
I would say it is. Especially since it is not that straightforward to do when you have deleted both relations already in your local data. > > There is nothing wrong about deleting these two relations, why should it > result in an error? > > We have already the rule to upload first all nodes, then all ways and > then all relations. In a similar manner, JOSM should sort the relations > in a way that keeps the server happy. Exactly, it could first delete relations that don't have referrers. Matthias _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
