On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 10:38 +1000, Stephen Hope wrote: > On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn <[email protected]> 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 [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
