ICYMI, Richard Fairhurst contributed a patch to fix this problem that we're currently reviewing for inclusion: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/2526
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Jo <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you for dismissing all our arguments in one fell swoop. The > difference with reported bugs, is that said bugs did get addressed. If we > are anti-anything it's > anti-having-to-cleanup-with-no-possibility-to-shut-close-the-source-of-the-cause-of-precious-time-wasters. > If people were consciously breaking the data, this would most certainly be > called vandalism. If you manage to burn out the regular contributors is > OSM, you will have done the whole community a major disservice. > > Then there is the suggestion: it must not be a problem, as nobody bothered > to create a pull request. We are mappers, not JS programmers and how hard > can it really be to create dialogs to interact with your users? No need for > external contributions to accomplish that, all that's needed is the > willingness to stop annoying the rest of the community. > > 2015-02-12 0:40 GMT+01:00 Tom MacWright <[email protected]>: > >> 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 <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Tom MacWright <[email protected]> >>> 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 >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
