The damn project done in april 2023

Monthly updates sounds like fun. I will try it. I will report what has been done for the damn project each month. Along with reporting of what has been done, the main motivation is having fun and boosting my (not so good) writing skills. Therefore, I will not use Grammarly. I promise. So, excuse me. Or, rather excuse these reports. Thanks.

And yes, this form – the summary of the work done in one month – is still missing. Diaries cover one topic in (kind of greater) detail. Small notes and updates are being tooted. However, there is nothing except emails to keep me doing. (There should be something like: “Let’s change it! Woo hoo!”)

I know this is a little bit of PR, but it is not the main deal. Just believe me. The project is damn and I know it and that is important for my mental health, indeed.

Finally, if it is still not clear, the writing style is not serious, the message it is. (DISCLAIMER)

This is the April report, but (as this is the first one) we cannot resist to start with (my (the writer (of this April report)) favorite) achievement from the last year’s December. The issue reported by one of the (not the damn project) users has been fixed by changing four lines of code! Particularly, when you split a square, the splitted squares should have the same “state” the original square had, shouldn’t they? (This is not a late April fool.)

Please, note that the state of the new square after merging is still “to map”, because multiple squares with different states can be merged. We are discussing with AI if AI may help with this problem.

Anyway, back to April. We are skipping the update on the web clients, because it was posted on March, 31. Coincidence? We don’t think so. Maybe next time, but probably not.

In April, we have restructured and slightly rewritten our web page, the The main improvement is that after links to the resources, there are three (!) columns with links to relevant tools for mappers, reviewers, and managers. The main motivation for this change was that different groups of users like mappers (and beginners especially), advanced mappers and reviewers, or area managers, prefer different tools and workflows. We wanted to direct them the right way.

We have been working really hard on the issue reported to the (not the damn) project. Ughm, we should be honest, so: not so hard, because we spent a day adding few lines of code (75 to be exact) to the JOSM damn plugin, to enable loading of multiple imagery and WMS sources, and we released new version of the JOSM damn plugin within a day the issue has been reported. Ughm, we should be honest, so: it was not a day, but a few hours after the work day. However, we also managed to update and release and deploy refactored web clients, particularly mapper and panel. But only the day after.

At the end of the month, we released new manager for mappers that are area(‘)(s(’)) managers. This is the part of the web clients refactoring/unifying the codebase. The biggest improvement is probably the possibility of sorting and filtering the list of the areas, but the goal is just refactoring and we honestly hope the experience of the managers do not decrease. (We do not expect it to increase.)

NOTE: If you hesitate what refactoring is, consider it as wash dishes – it’s boring, not moving you forward, but deadly important.

The last “something” is the May “something”, but we decided to announce it now already. We are considering re-licensing our core service, the damn server, from GNU Affero General Public License version 3 to The Open Software License 3.0 (OSL-3.0). Any opinion is appreciated! Our main motivation for this move is that we struggle to understand what “affero” means, we don’t speak latin, and we are always astonished when we try to understand the text of the AGPLv3. Please, note that we want a copyleft/reciprocal license for the damn server: If you change the database, the community should know.

That’s all for now, for April, for April now, and for April, now. You did a great job reading up to here! (Not, really. You probably have been procrastinating anyway, but that’s ok as it is not our business.) We will try to keep the following reports as short as this, but shorter. (There should be something like: “See you soon!” but we deliberately avoid it.)

Divide and map. Now. – the damn project – helps mappers by dividing a big area into smaller squares that people can map together.


Since you ask, my opinion is: Stick with AGPLv3, it is fine. OSL-3.0 in particular is not recommended to be used by the Free software foundation.

“Affero Inc.” was just the name of the company that has written the initial version of “Affero GPL” license, thus the name. It is written in English (even if in legalise as most licenses are, except maybe WTFPL).

You certainly don’t need to know any Latin to use or read or understand “AGPLv3”; just like you don’t have to be a zoologist to read or use or understand “GNU GPLv3”.

It is actually rather simple modification of the “GNU GPLv3”; do you also have problem with it too? (yes, many people have complained that “GPLv3” is longer and harder to read than previous version “GPLv2”. And even “GPLv2” was much harder to read and understand than “WTFPL”). But in short:

Simply put, the AGPLv3 is effectively the GPLv3, but with an additional licensing term that ensures that users who interact over a network with modified versions of the program can receive the source code for that program

Or, you can always use if you want the get the gist of some license.

GNU AGPLv3 is as copyleft/reciprocal as it goes, and popular enough that people know it. I’d stick with it for that purpose, unless I had good understanding of the subject matter (and alternatives) and overwhelming reason to change (not grasping the etimology of the name of the company that has written the first version of some legal document is irrelevant and does not really count as “overwhelming reason” :smile:).

Thank you for your insight! I am a bit surprised that FSF recommends against other-than-GPL licenses, but I clearly missed the problematic point of the OSL. I am thinking how would it work if we would ask our contributors to ask us for obtaining the express assent to the terms of the license under which we have published the damn server.

If I may be honest, I managed to read the OSL. (Not saying anything about understanding.) However, I am always giving up the AGPL before even the half of the text. Are you sure it’s not a problem I know so little about GNU? Or, if not Latin, maybe knowing a little bit of Bayogoula could help?

Thank you!