On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:45 PM, andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 17:37, 80n <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> 80n wrote: > >>> > >>> I'm particularly interested in how it could be made easier for > >>> contributors to handle the situation. How will they know which OSM > they > >>> should contribute to? > >> > >> I'd prefer if you chose the wording: "Which collaborative mapping > >> platform..." - because there can only be one OSM project. > > > > Yes, let's get the terminology right. That's the kind of thing I'm > looking > > for. How do we make it clear to contributors and users? > > How about one OSM project with multiple databases? In the end it's a > single osm community building all of the databases anyway. Part of > the community wants its data under a new license. Another part wants > its data under the old license in case the main database is switched > entirely to the new license by the first group. And the biggest group > doesn't care. It'd seem unfair if one of the groups gets the > exclusive right to use the name OSM. > Let's put the question a different way. After the switch there's a CC-BY-SA licensed planet dump knocking around that contains data that may be useful to some people. What can or should the OSM community do to help people who want to use that data?
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
