We also aimed to have no bugs and like every software project before us, have failed to achieve that goal.
The uproar about iD is the same as the uproar about the map style, website, user groups, code of conduct, Steve Coast, the board, imports, license change, attribution, and practically everything else about OpenStreetMap. It's not anti-iD bias, of course. It's anti-everything bias. On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Bryce Nesbitt <bry...@obviously.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Tom MacWright <t...@macwright.org> wrote: > >> Ever since 2012, in the second commit ever, "Not breaking other people's >> data" has been one of the three clearly stated public design goals of iD. >> > > This goal does not appear to have been carried out. > > The iD project comes off as tone deaf to breaking data concerns: Look at > the uproar over issues of "breaking data". Look at the core team response, > which is mostly defensive posturing, not oriented to solutions. > > Why has iD taken such a beating on the mailing list "breaking data" > issues? I don't think it's just anti-iD bias. > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
