Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A community-led fork of Organic Maps

comaps.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 217 posts

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#201

Post by aucisson_masque »

poincaredisk wrote: post #194
aucisson_masque wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apes Together Strong Absolutely 100% agree with your statement, Linux desktop is the perfect example of that. You get a billion different distribution that all comes from debian, arch and maybe fedora but that's all. In my opinion, there should be 3 Linux distribution. That's all. For instance Ubuntu: Yeah Ubuntu gnome suck, yeah canonical push snap package when flappack are better but do you really need a new dist…

>In my opinion, there should be 3 Linux distribution. That's all. Initially I instinctively agreed with you - certainly there's too many fragmentation in the Linux distro space! Then I recalled I use NixOs, and it probably didn't make it to your top 3...

Couldn't nixos main feature be implemented in a mainstream distribution ?

Technically you can install nix package manager on Debian, and what is nixos main interest without it's package manager ?

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#202

Post by wltr »

I would be sceptical to this initiative too, as they never mentioned in their timeline on the co maps website that the reason the original Maps with me project was forked because the original one was sold. And not just sold, but sold to Russians, the infamous Mail ru group. Which is basically the KGB spying project led by a greasy oligarch.

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#203

Post by atoav »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #86

The concern seems to be they want a bunch of guarantees about what will be done with the project - not because there is a change happening from Organic, but because they're afraid of a change happening in the future . If such a change happens in the future, they can fork then. I mean, hell, this already happened; they had Maps.ME, it was sold, Roman forked it to Organic. If it gets sold again they can fork again. Thi…

Isn't that a valid worry? Especially in a project that needs user contribution the eventual horizon does matter.

Would you shovel dirt in a community garden project if you know the guy on top will eventually turn it into a commercial business? That means your work wasn't going towards a nice community garden as you thought, but it was going towards one guy being too stingy to actually pay labour. Sure maybe that guy didn't know he would do that from the beginning, but what difference would it make?

Governance does matter.

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#205

Post by TsiCClawOfLight »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #201
poincaredisk wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In my opinion, there should be 3 Linux distribution. That's all. Initially I instinctively agreed with you - certainly there's too many fragmentation in the Linux distro space! Then I recalled I use NixOs, and it probably didn't make it to your top 3...

Couldn't nixos main feature be implemented in a mainstream distribution ? Technically you can install nix package manager on Debian, and what is nixos main interest without it's package manager ?

It manages the entire, immutable, OS with it. That's a completely different paradigm, you cannot simply mix them!

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#206

Post by treyd »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #182
lolinder wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the open source community is too quick to make "just fork it later" the answer to all our governance woes. Look at the state of WordPress: the (B?)DFL actively bans people from the community for critiquing his self-described "nuclear war" waged against his biggest competitor in the hosting space, which "nuclear war" has caught thousands of members of the community in the crossfire. And yet we see no fork…

> Apes Together Strong Absolutely 100% agree with your statement, Linux desktop is the perfect example of that. You get a billion different distribution that all comes from debian, arch and maybe fedora but that's all. In my opinion, there should be 3 Linux distribution. That's all. For instance Ubuntu: Yeah Ubuntu gnome suck, yeah canonical push snap package when flappack are better but do you really need a new dist…

> yeah canonical push snap package when flappack are better but do you really need a new distribution because of that ?

In practice yes, since Canonical is replacing essential system components to depend on snap. So you can't just "not use it", you're forced to be dependent on their upstream package hosting service that you can't rehost yourself.

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#207

Post by RetroTechie »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #98
lolinder wrote: post #43

I'm increasingly disaffected by the idea of BDFL-run projects. The concept is appealing—it's essentially Plato's philosopher king. The BDFL can unstick decision making and ensure the project moves forward without having to litigate every decision in committee, they maintain context and vision throughout the life of the project, and because they're not accountable to anyone they can make the right call for the project…

Worth noting the distinction between a BDFL-project and a community project. A community project's aim is loosey-goosey. The mission, values, governance, ownership/control, etc can change. While there is input from the community, they are often led by one or two dominant personalities. The project can often be pressured into making changes that are actually worse, or don't reflect the views of a collective of contrib…

>A community project's aim is loosey-goosey. The mission, values, governance, ownership/control, etc can change. While there is input from the community, they are often led by one or two dominant personalities.

Project direction can change in any case. Even against user's wishes.

The difference: in a community-led project, it's usually >1 person at the helm. And those leaders can put themselves at risk of being replaced by their community. Which at least puts a cap on how much they can push through their own decisions.

A benevolent dictator doesn't have this problem. And therefore can move easier.

But it's a fine line, and very easy to run foul of the "benevolent" part @ some point. Few DFLs manage this long-term.

Not to mention that over time, a community's desired project direction may simple diverge from project leader's vision. Pet project with a handful like-minded contributors != big project with many users & contributors.

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#209

Post by jraph »

david-gpu wrote: post #155
jraph wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On OSMAnd I have tweaked the routing algorithm to my taste and it's hard to beat. How do you do this? Is there something I can read or watch about this? Are you using BRouter?

Here are two sources that you may find useful: [0] https://osmand.net/docs/technical/osmand-file-formats/osmand... [1] https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd-resources/blob/master/ro...

Nice, thanks!

Re: A community-led fork of Organic Maps

#210

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

K2h wrote: post #197
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but the thing is that I don't think any of this data is "self-collected". I suspect that OSM gets most of its US trail data (or at least western state trail data) from the National Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. I also suspect that incorporating such a data source into Google Maps is relatively trivial, but they just seemed to have done so.

I map many trails on osm from personal site surveys and a combination of sat imagery and my gpx files. No way google is doing that because there is no one to steal the data from. It was me, the enthusiast that put it in osm directly. That’s just me and the trails I load tho. Example - Latest was short one at monkeyface falls. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/34.098058/-116.955639

I hike on trails in New Mexico, and I find the existing trail data on osmand/OSM to be astoundingly accurate. I had concluded that NSF/BLM must have data.

So few people hike these trails that I do not believe they were entered one by one. The one "trail" I hiked that was entered by someone I deleted later that day, because it should not have been shown as a trail.

Post reply on HN