On Thursday 23 June 2011, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > @Eugene > > Please do not extend the discussion with incompatible examples. > My example fits exactly the description of what is called > forking: > Try > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_%28software_development%29 > http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/RightToFork
Funny you should bring this up - I was going to talk about software forks, but thought better of it. By your definition, Linux gets forked thousands of times a day, so surely must be a project in dire straits. Yet people somehow still know what "Linux" is and where to get it, because it tends to center itself around where all the competent people are. > @Graham, > My reaction was just against the accusation of dividing the community > and create a competitor. Forking is a fundamental right in Open Stuff, > and therefore not te be criticized in the way you do. > > The fact is that FOSM.ORG look more like OSM then OSM , as the latter > excluded communitymembers that won't accept a majority choice. > OSM voluntarily and willfully took the risk that some of us > might start a fork. > One of the founding piles under Open Software and Open Data. > OSM has the right to change their license, especially when based > on a majority acceptance (not to be called a vote) but the *changing > party* is the > fork, not the continuing "half". End the fork took the assets .... boooh So because people have decided to start a voluntary project, they have to be answerable to absolutely everybody... everywhere... ever? No matter how unreasonable or logically warped they are (no names mentioned)? Everyone gets a veto on everything. Right? robert. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
