blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted { margin-left: 0 !important; border-left:1px
#715FFA solid !important; padding-left:1ex !important; background-color:white
!important; } Paul, thanks I hadn't seen that before, and it's a good response.
Mikel
On Friday, January 6, 2017, 7:05 PM, Paul Norman <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/6/2017 7:37 AM, Mikel Maron wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39517002 is an example. There were
issues with this import, sure. This was not vandalism, advertising, or a fatal
breakage of the map -- not a situation where an immediate action was justified
(and definitely there are other situations where immediate action is needed).
An active mapper and an active community were communicating, acting to fix the
problems. The reverter in this case choose to ignore the mapper and the
community and took a unilateral action, in contradiction to some guidelines on
the wiki. This kind of approach discourages community contribution and
cooperation. We can do a lot better to cooperatively improve the map and how we
map it.
The revert in this case did not involve the Data Working Group. The DWG
statement on this issue
ishttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2016-September/007260.html.
Quoting from it
Advance permission is not required for reverts, nor for normal mapping
activities. At the same time, users are expected to be responsible,
particularly when using tools for reverting which allow large-scale
changes where other users may disagree with them.
Where there are problems with an import reverting is an option, but
just one of many, and often not the appropriate first action. Unless
there are legal problems or fatal problems with the import it is
preferable if the original importer can fix the problems in a timely
manner. There was every indication this was going to happen in this case.
The revert of 39517002 was inappropriate and counter-productive. New
actions like this revert may lead to further Data Working Group
involvement and potentially blocks. If the Canadian community needs help
reverting 41749133 and 41756737, the Data Working Group can revert those
changesets.
Because there seems to be some confusion, neither Nakaner or Mikel are members
of the Data Working Group.
Frederik Ramm, Andy Townsend, and myself are the three people in this thread
who are also members of the DWG. Unless they state otherwise, their opinions
aren't representing the DWG.
Paul Norman
For the Data Working Group
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
