@Ltrlg Zverik is both the author and operator of the imagery offset database, so I think he does know about it :-).

That said, I still think (this is not a new discussion) that the way to go is not to completely automate things but at least add support to iD (all other general purpose editors have support I believe), and at least suggest using offsets if they exist for the current imagery.

IMHO it is a bit dangerous to conflate the issue of which tools and systems the OSMF is using (aka the FOSS question), with in many ways different issue of maintaining user privacy.

The only touching point is really that FOSS communication channel software makes it easier to self host, or at least host with a trusted provider. FAANG+M are the leading contributors to OSS, but that doesn’t make them in any form a trusted provider of services.

Naturally there is a bit of a (very big and deep) culture gap at least between the US and European developer communities in this, and to generalize a bit, on the US side they are mainly seen as potential future employers (if not already the current one) and critical views are widely considered inappropriate.

Just see the already mentioned community index, or iD leaking OSM contributor information to FB by default for examples. The later which seems to be, judged by the lack of action, considered totally OK by the OSMF.

Now local communities can choose what they want, but as I’ve suggested multiple times over the years, the OSMF should provide at least one communication channel per “type” that allows contributors to participate without requiring them to create new accounts and have their data monetized. If the users take it up or not is up to them, but at least we’ve then provided the option of choice.

osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

@mmd yes there are a number of CI/CD options available with gitea. The problem is however not just one of FOSS though.

We know that providing free, essentially unlimited, computing resources is not a winning or sustainable business model, and that the party with any one specific CI is going to end after a while. So now the party at the expense of travis has ended, most projects have simply moved on to github, but at some point in time that is going to end too and the wailing and teeth gnashing will be large and loud.

IMHO moving to a self hosted software collaboration platform really only makes sense if the OSMF can provide a stable CI/CD infrastructure with it too, which naturally impacts ops a bit more than running just another service.

@blendergeek using slack is a deliberate choice of the US “community” well to be exact, some prolific members, that migrated the US community more or less “voluntarily” off IRC and other OSMF operated channels. The community index (which is what displayed by iD) is only relevant in that it was part of the “voluntarily” bit.

@xamanu while this is not really the right place for a tech dicsussion. gitea uses https://github.com/markbates/goth for OAuth support and while most of the providers are for OAuth 2.0 support at least the Xero one is 1.0a. So I’m not quite sure what would be “quite difficult” about adding OSM, work yes.

In any case does your answer imply that gitlab supports (mis-)using 1.0a?

Did the group consider recommending gitea over the (incredibly clumsy imho) gitlab?

gitea while not perfect would seem to be nearer to what we would expect from FOSS and it would seem to be substantially more realistic to implement something like authentication via osm.org than with gitlab.

osmand supposedly supports conditional access for some combinations.

But nothing is likely to support what you tagged: - maxweightrating is essentially unused compared to maxweight - conditional restriction tagging in turn restrictions isn’t supported by anybody afaik (and the comment wrt maxweightrating applies even more here) - in general the conditional tagging grammar is massively underspecified and mainly serves to humour people that think stringing long combinations of tags together is a good idea and will actually do something.

The question is, why tag it in such a complicated and likely non-functional fashion in the first place? Simply add maxweight:hgv=10 to the road segment going straight on (and if necessary any thing going off to the right) and that should force router that support maxweight:hgv to not plan the route straight on and plan a turn to the left (if you feel better about it you can add maxweightrating:hgv tags too).

There are some known issues with 15.1 that will be fixed in the January maintenance up date https://github.com/MarcusWolschon/osmeditor4android/issues (or if you are building the app yourself as soon as you re-build).

@SK53 there are some underlying architectural issues, that, if changed, would make use on large screen devices easier. Essentially it is re-factoring to allow use of the property editor in parallel with the map display. This isn’t such an issue on phones as there is no space to display it any way (though there are some other reasons why this would still be helpful).

@apm-wa to clarify this again: I’m not accusing the board of dark motives, or anything else than the best intentions. I’m just pointing out that things seem to be confused with respect to how the working groups were operating up to now and the impact of the proposed change.

Just a comment on “ I originally proposed it as a working group but was informed by old-timers that working groups may ONLY be created by the community, not by the Board,” the old timers in question must of have suffered a lapse of memory because if anything the exact opposite was true, see the board minutes I linked to.

Naturally creating a working group without community buy in the sense that there are actually people prepared to work on it is difficult, so obviously creating the working group and having people willing to serve on it tend to go hand in hand which is what might have caused the confusion.

There is nothing stopping the board from creating an additional agreement outside of the NDAs that would define the space in which volunteers can act. But in any case if the board is concerned that it can’t, legally squeaky clean, delegate responsibility to non-board members, then it doesn’t just have an issue with volunteers and the working groups, it is going to have one with employees too. So best completely revamp this in the AoAs instead of doing something that in practical terms is just going to cause issues.

_ But if they’d create a working group or a different informal structure for that, they’d run into the problem that such entity could not make any legally binding statements towards personnel (like instructing them what to do, handle requests for leave, dealing with payment matters, approval of deliverables/invoices from independent contractors etc.)_

What do you think the working groups have been doing the last decade+? Naturally within an agreed remit and budget, and with the purse strings held by the treasurer (in a larger organisation that would typically be delegated to staff too), but de facto this has been done by the WG, who do you think signed off on all the trademark related bills, or who orders and checks hardware? In the real world and not lala land, boards of companies do not actually do all the work themselves.

The solution is to simply add addresses (with postcodes), naturally only if Malaysia uses something that fits in to the Schema we currently use osm.wiki/Key:addr If it doesn’t that is something that would have to be discussed.

And this is the app https://www.refill.bz.it/?mz=9&mc=46.640008243515915,11.351623535156252 looks harmless, probably just buggy.

@SomeoneElse see for example osm.org/user/danielbir with > 6000 empty changesets.

@SomeoneElse I was actually prompted to have a quick look at the empty changeset numbers, and they have doubled from the usual ~5’000/month since August and the “Refill Südtirol” app is the major culprit (for the increase, the rest are the usual suspects JOSM, maps.me and id).

Generating a list of user ids as I write.

There are regularly updated statistics on editor usage avaliable here osm.wiki/Editor_usage_stats

It seems as if you are actually using changeset counts and not edits as you claim, this is not only extremely mislieading and distorts actual use of the various apps, changeset counts are simply not a good metric for anything.

@CjMalone this has been tried numerous times and the result has been the non-commital statements we’ve receive to date (not an outright no, but not an outright and clear, official “yes” either).