On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:25:19 +0100 Laurence Penney <[email protected]> wrote:
> For the record, I'm 100% against OSM becoming a place for general > historical data unless, at the very least, it's been proved that this > kind of historical geodata can work well in a parallel database, and > shows no sign of interfering with the task of mapping the world as it > is. In my first contribution to this thread I listed numerous > concerns that including all of history would give rise to, and don't > think I came across as supportive. > sounds like another case for osm-fork _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
