I'm hoping the April 1 deletion date, gets pushed back. There are way too many red nodes to be replaced. But alas I don't think thats going to happen.
OpenStreetMap
I'm hoping the April 1 deletion date, gets pushed back. There are way too many red nodes to be replaced. But alas I don't think thats going to happen.
Discussion
Comment from marscot on 11 March 2012 at 20:13
yeah working hard in my area on the red bits, a few more weeks would be great
Comment from compdude on 11 March 2012 at 22:03
Because of OSMF's failure to come up with a satisfactory license, many people have declined it. And those of us who accepted the license are, in a way, being "punished" because we now have to waste time redrawing the red nodes and ways instead of actually improving the map!
Comment from compdude on 11 March 2012 at 22:10
Another question: If people haven't decided whether or not to accept the license by April 1 (if they've stopped editing OSM, for example), do we have to replace their data too? Will that also get deleted?
Comment from Vincent de Phily on 12 March 2012 at 12:43
* There's no way a license change could have got 100% approval. All things considered, I think the ODBL/CT did pretty well at being accepted.
* at this stage, decliners and undecided are pretty much equivalent for remapping purpose.
* If I'd feel punished by anyone, it would be by the non-agreers rather than by the OSMF. Remapping is a pain, but a necessary one.
* If remapping feels too boring, by all means do "normal" mapping instead. Mapping is still essentially a hoby for most people, so we'd much rather have you enjoy contributing in the forsteeable future than leave because you performed boring task out of "duty".
Comment from chillly on 12 March 2012 at 16:57
Almost all of the remapping I have done has been to replace old stuff by long-gone contributors. It is almost all poor quality because it was traced from lo-res Yahoo. The replacement is an improvement. It also has forced me to look at areas that are only traced and need surveying to find all the details you just can't get from aerial imagery. That means trips out to see new places in detail which will be interesting.
I think every large community like OSM will have people like @compdude in it, negative, moaners who want to drag the process down and pour cold water on the hard work of the other volunteers. The rest of us enjoy mapping and remapping or we do something else. If it really makes you so unhappy @compdude, take up something you like - life's too short to be unhappy.
Delay the change over? No way. It will just give the moaners more time to make a fuss over nothing.
If people haven't accepted the new terms and licence, for what ever reason, we cannot continue to use their data in the newly licensed database. They did not agree to that and it would be disrespectful, and probably illegal, to just take it.
Comment from TarzanASG on 12 March 2012 at 17:21
Unreliable and nobody known ODbL must die! Upcoming CC v4.0 with full support of database right forever! Seriously no need to delete our data and to increase deathly free license proliferation using ODbL, we can just update CC 2.0 to CC 4.0 (creating derivative works) without problems.
Comment from chriscf on 13 March 2012 at 11:12
Unfortunately, I don't believe we can do a straight upgrade from BY-SA 2.0 to 4.0, since we'd still have to go through this process, and we'd still be getting the inherent flaws (non-applicable in the US amongst others, uncertainty for reuse, etc.). If anything, the problem with the process has been that it's taken too long. We should have cut it off after a year back in 2008 before idiots started importing BY-SA data.