Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:07:48 +1100 David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 00:04 +, David Groom wrote: I just want to draw attention to the survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS , the link was mentionedn Richard Weait's email to this list on 1 Feb, but I have to admit that I missed it the first time I read his posting Out of interest, who runs this survey and who is (or when will we be) allowed to know the results? David and can I do it 20 times as Jane Smith? seeing it asks for a name ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 16 February 2011 07:07, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 00:04 +, David Groom wrote: I just want to draw attention to the survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS , the link was mentionedn Richard Weait's email to this list on 1 Feb, but I have to admit that I missed it the first time I read his posting Out of interest, who runs this survey and who is (or when will we be) allowed to know the results? The survey is an informal survey setup by Richard Weait of the Licensing Working Group (LWG) to gauge interest and get a feel for how many people would potentially use such a feature before significant time is invested in development. The survey link + intro details were posted in @talk-au and @talk around 2 weeks ago [1]. @talk-gb was incorrectly left off but will be corrected shortly [2]. I believe 5 people have responded. Richard has figures. LWG has discussed alternative potential options for the the flagging of changesets eg email. 1: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2011-February/007642.html 2: Done. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011-February/010922.html Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
- Original Message - From: Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 1:39 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset? On 7 February 2011 11:05, 4x4falcon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: it will also be in fosm.org already and will stay there after any deletion from osm. Plus there are several others storing full planet files for after any deletion date. Thanks for that link. I wasn't aware of it. -- Andrew I just want to draw attention to the survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS , the link was mentionedn Richard Weait's email to this list on 1 Feb, but I have to admit that I missed it the first time I read his posting Regards David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 00:04 +, David Groom wrote: I just want to draw attention to the survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS , the link was mentionedn Richard Weait's email to this list on 1 Feb, but I have to admit that I missed it the first time I read his posting Out of interest, who runs this survey and who is (or when will we be) allowed to know the results? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 7 February 2011 11:05, 4x4falcon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: it will also be in fosm.org already and will stay there after any deletion from osm. Plus there are several others storing full planet files for after any deletion date. Thanks for that link. I wasn't aware of it. -- Andrew ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 5 February 2011 21:35, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: Well, yes. This is one reason I've stopped putting data in, if I don't know the original source of the ways I'm working on. If you want to be sure your changes can be kept, and you know the original way is bad, you could delete it entirely and draw your own. Well, then what I'll do is download the areas in JOSM, save them as OSM files and stash them. Then if where I've been is wiped out I'll have something saved to merge in or refer to at least. If nothing else I still have MBs of photos of street signs! I just don't understand why data I've marked survey would be deleted. I mean, I'd be surprised if there aren't some ways I've traced from Nearmaps but unintentionally forgot to source. If those are going to be trusted, why not stuff explicitly surveyed? Bah - sorry for grumbling. -- Andrew ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
Well, then what I'll do is download the areas in JOSM, save them as OSM files and stash them. Then if where I've been is wiped out I'll have something saved to merge in or refer to at least. If nothing else I still have MBs of photos of street signs! Good idea but it will also be in fosm.org already and will stay there after any deletion from osm. Plus there are several others storing full planet files for after any deletion date. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 5 February 2011 15:30, Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com wrote: Surely that can't be correct? That is the way it was explained on one of the mailing lists a while back. I haven't seen any notice that it is going to change, though with the mushroom treatment we're getting, I could have easily missed it. The theory is that if you are improving on a previous way, it is still based on that way, and is therefore tainted, and they'd rather lose data than have stuff they're not sure of. For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but They have no problem with the license, it's the CT's they have issue with (which allows the license to change later). I don't know if they've finalised them yet, though. nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. Well, yes. This is one reason I've stopped putting data in, if I don't know the original source of the ways I'm working on. If you want to be sure your changes can be kept, and you know the original way is bad, you could delete it entirely and draw your own. Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. There's various stuff on the OSMF section somewhere, but it's not easy to find. Mostly I've stumbled across it from various links people have dropped in different mailing lists. And most of that seems to be out of date, anyway (meeting minutes, etc). If there's a simple, laid out roadmap anywhere, I haven't seen it. The closest I saw had a six week plan, starting about this time last year - it lasted about a week. Stephen ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
- Original Message - From: Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 5:30 AM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset? On 3 February 2011 08:38, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. Surely that can't be correct? For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. As I understand it the position is potentially far worse than you outline above. Individual bits of data won't be dropped because at one one time it was sourced from Nearmap. ALL your data will be marked as non-compliant if you cant agree to the CT's. This is why in my situation the relicensing per changeset would be so useful. It allows the 80 % of my contributions to be marked as CT/ODbL compliant. However, as yet I am unclear what actually happens to data which has been entered by a user account which does not agree to the CT's. (see below) Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. The nearest I can see to an answer is in the paragraph relation to phase 4 of the implementation plan [1] ; What do we do with the people who have declined or not responded [to agree to the CT's]? Their contributions would not be available under the future ODbL version of the database. Which presumably implies that all their data, and anything based on that data will be removed from copies of the planet files, and will no longer be shown when using any of the editors. I presume that some time in the next 7 weeks (ie before 31 March 2011) it might be made more apparent what will happen, since in order for an ODbL complaint database to be available on 1 April I trust that someone is working at the moment, not only on the principles involved, but also on the actual coding necessary. David -- Andrew [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan#PHASE_4_-_CC-BY-SA_edits_no_longer_accepted._.28Phase_3_.2B_8_weeks_subject_to_critical_mass.29 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 12:34 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote: [ ... ] I presume that some time in the next 7 weeks (ie before 31 March 2011) it might be made more apparent what will happen, since in order for an ODbL complaint database to be available on 1 April I trust that someone is working at the moment, not only on the principles involved, but also on the actual coding necessary. A small thing perhaps, but the next step requested by the board prior to 31 March is Phase 3, which adds the decline option to the current accept option. I expect that the improved CTs (1.2.4) will be available at the same time, pending the required translations. March 31 is not a switch over date, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:45:52 -0500 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: A small thing perhaps, but the next step requested by the board prior to 31 March is Phase 3, which adds the decline option to the current accept option. I expect that the improved CTs (1.2.4) will be available at the same time, pending the required translations. March 31 is not a switch over date, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan In that case I've missed some meeting minutes, because that is not what I last read. Mushroom theory confirmed. My understanding (shared by some others) was that Phase 3 was to start 1st April 2011, that is if not accepting new terms, no editing. the Implementation Plan referenced above doesn't seem to have adding the Decline button in it, but it is an important step. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 3 February 2011 08:38, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. Surely that can't be correct? For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. -- Andrew ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:30:47 +0800 Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 08:38, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. Surely that can't be correct? For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. There is no easy answer for this. How does one sort out exactly what has been surveyed and what is traced? Then we still aren't sure if you can agree to the contributor terms yet, having used NearMap at all - the CTs are still being revised, and until there is some 'final' version, again there is no answer. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 10:38 +1000, Stephen Hope wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. That was my worry, but I figured that the powers-that-be wouldnt push a change through that would devastate the map so much. This is one reason I have stopped doing any work around my area, until this mess gets sorted out. I suspect that all this area is going to go away, so any work I do in the meantime is wasted, whether it is in itself valid or not. I hadnt thought of that perspective. Id simply cut back on my mapping because the lack of nearmap basically made it fruitless. I do have to wonder though, how many mappers have dropped off their edits during this whole changeover period, for that reason or similar. The only consolation is that any work you do isnt so much 'wasted' because it will be maintained in the public export and the numerous forks. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
There have been previous discussions regarding per changeset relicensing. I'd like to know if developing the tools to allow per changeset relicensing is worthwhile. There will be some effort involved in the coding, so it would be good to know in advance if this option will be used by many or few mappers. The intent of per changeset relicensing is to permit those with a general agreement to the terms and license, but with a specific concern about a source for a particular changeset to relicense their data, but not relicense that data about which they are concerned. Example: Prof. Mapper maps by GPS and survey as she travels. She also helped a friend map in Erehwon, and added street names from Erehwon Council data. Erehwon council have given permission for derivation to OSM under CC-By-SA, but discussion is continuing re: CT/ODbL, Prof. Mapper agrees with CT/ODbL but recognizes that She doesn't have permission yet to relicense the Erehwon street names. Prof. Mapper could accept CT/ODbL for the bulk of her mapping, and mark the seven Erehwon changesets a with a checkbox for Do Not Relicense and with a note, Pending Erehwon Council permission. This allows several options in the future. It points out datasets and mappers with interest in discussing relicensing with a specific data provider. Should Erehwon Council agree to ODbL prior to any change over date, the data can be included. If not, Prof. Mapper may continue with their unencumbered data. http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
