“iD editor: It is time for us to end this abusive relationship”
Well this is certainly an inflamatory post about the current state of iD & .
Although I think this phrasing is too extreme, I do broadly agree that the community should think about whether we should always have the current released version of iD on osm.org.
openstreetmap.org/user/woodpec

Like all open source projects, I'm willing to let the iD devs do whatever they want. It's their project, we aren't/I amn't paying their wages, they have no duty to listen to me. Let them do what they want.

Otherwise you have the unhealthy situation of people thinking FLOSS maintainers owe them something.

Follow

IMO iD doesn't belong to us, but openstreeetmap.org does. That is under common ownership of the OSM community. And the OSM community can think about whether we want this particular bunch of code in that particular place.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
En OSM Town | Mapstodon for OpenStreetMap

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!