Zaczero
Clarify scope in README
Congratulations on a very challenging project.
I am very confused about the scope of the project and the README didn't help much. It would be great to clarify the first paragraph, or at least to add some clarifications to the proposed features.
Welcome to OpenStreetMap-NG, an innovative unofficial Python fork of openstreetmap.org. Our mission is to revolutionize the map and provide a better experience for all users.
The problem here is that people have very different understandings of what openstreetmap.org (the website) is or is supposed to be. The main questions left unanswered are:
- Does the project aim to fork the OSM database?
- Does the project aim to offer "just a website" or more?
Depending on the answers, many more questions arise. For example: if you fork the DB, you'll need to come up with a way to handle divergent updates; if you don't, and this becomes just a new frontend for osm.org like Microsoft once created, you'll need to stick to the osm.org contribution process very closely.
The project is a backwards-compatible alternative implementation of the OSM project - frontend, backend, database. With focus on "Main Goals" listed in the README. I think most of the confusion will go away with the launch of the demo site, which was supposed to happen at the end of 2024 :upside_down_face:. This will make it easy to see what OSM-NG is, and what it is not (e.g. it's not a new tiles renderer).
Perhaps watching some of the recent videos at https://peertube.monicz.dev/ will help to visualize the idea. Or reading through posts collected at the wiki page.
Does the project aim to fork the OSM database?
Nope. OSM-NG will not be a separate project. Instead, it aims to upgrade the existing osm.org platform - whether it succeeds at that, time will tell.
Does the project aim to offer "just a website" or more?
I think it offers: frontend, backend, database, migration scripts from the Ruby instance.
I see. If you want to try out a total rewrite, including the DB, but without forking the DB, I guess you'll have to prevent local contributions. Maybe it can be marked as a staging environment with clear warnings that all edits will be thrown away after a few days and a new dump imported from main OSM, or something.
If you're trying to get this adopted as new OSM website, this also needs to be kept in mind when deciding whether to expand the scope of the website. The OSMF may be less keen on trying a total rewrite if it also involves expanding into areas which are currently perceived as being someone else's job. (Most of the additional features being proposed are currently handled by third-party mobile applications and other services.)
Thank you for linking the diaries. I've now skimmed all the entries and I didn't see any answers to my fundamental questions. It's still very good to have them!
The demo/test website will be marked as demo/test, if that's what you are talking about. I come with an assumption that OSMF wants OSM to be the best open mapping platform so I focus on ideas that in my opinion make sense. It's always easier to cut features than to add them.