On 14/12/15 18:14, John Goodman wrote: >> Please avoid being gratuitously offensive by describing something >> that lots >> of volunteers have put countless hours into as "braindead". > > No offense meant; it just seemed an apt term for a search algorithm > that favors matches 15,000 km away from one right in the area of > obvious interest. > This still sounds rather silly. It is your definition of important, your important is not everyone's view of important. Nominatim has a rather large back log of a lot more helpful and important features and fixes, with very few around to actually keep it running. This thread feels not important in contrast to many other things.
I'm unfortunately not donating time to develop Nominatim. Non the less this thread feels strange. It is good to voice issues, but please accept the answer. Not much good comes of repeating how some think the priorities are not set right. Do it, don't keep talking about it. (By which I mean make an implementation, and see it fail lots of times until you get it right. It is a rather complex topic.) Michael P.S: John please do not top-post. Each of your mails started a new thread in the mails. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
