On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Steve Coast <[email protected]> wrote: > I mean throw away the efforts of all the licensing work we've done because > one guy doesn't like technical detail X or has moral objection Y. That is, > that we have spent many man years on this and there is no way to make > everyone happy. We tried hard and it's time to move on. Also, once we're > switched it's much easier to make the kind of fixes you want as subsequent > switches are orders of magnitude more easy. Thus, lets put our minor > differences aside and work for the greater goals we have, like mapping the > world.
I for one think a partnership between FOSM and OSMF would be a great thing. We *are* both trying to map the world. I've made this invitation before but I'd like to make it again: Work with us to help preserve, and keep up to date, the CC-BY-SA data which otherwise would be left to rot in a static "final dump". If you believe, as you say, that CC-BY-SA might work out the problems (which you say are minor) in the 4.0 license, then you'll be especially glad you have FOSM to help you switch back. There's no reason that FOSM and OSMF have to have a hostile relationship. We're both trying to map the world, under the license we deem most appropriate. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
