Hi @Artemis64, that sounds good! When it’s ready, it would be awesome to benchmark somehow your new version, damn server, and HOT Tasking Manager. I would be interesting :)

Hi tordans. Thanks for the link. I think I saw it somewhere but couldn’t use it as it is too specific. And I don’t know node.js.

I feel like the most problematic thing is to name things. Also, someone already pointed out that the name is problematic in a religion point of view. I will think about it. Until then, please consider the project damn awesome, thanks :)

Thanks.

The list of running instances is at damn project website. However, just the “developer” instance of the server is only running currently. By “developer” I mean cheap, low-performance server.

I would be really happy to test the damn project with some local community on self-hosted premises, however.

Missing Maps and HOT Tasking Manager are applications that use OpenStreetMap. Therefore, the problem is on their side.

In another view – OpenStreetMap does not push any data to Missing Maps nor HOT Tasking Manager.

@russdeffner I like your mindset. It’s the mindset of a mentor, I think. Which is great. But I can’t agree that validators should be mentors. There are two reasons:

1. Mappers can be mentors, too. No need to be validator to help novice mappers.

2. Validation must be binary (valid/invalid) to achieve quality, IMHO.

I must agree that every validator should provide at least why invalidating message. That’s for feedback. Any other help is mentoring, which is greatly appreciated. But I wouldn’t blame validators for not being mentors. I think that it can be beneficial to distinguish between validators and mentors.

I think that needs more work is a definitely better message. I don’t understand, why these basic things were not considered in GUI design of TM.

@russdeffner I believe that for making mapper better, the feedback is important. For making the map better, the quality assurance is needed. May I ask with what you disagree? Because I don’t see the conflict between my understanding and your comment.

@Kathyaus I got the point regarding disaster mapping and I do agree. I didn’t consider that as I am usually mapping Missing Maps projects.

I am thinking about invalidate fast approach during the mapathons where the small group of validators tries to validate as many beginner mappers as possible. I have to agree that when the task is old or disaster response, including mapping to validation is beneficial.

Thanks, Thomas. That tm_branch is what I was looking for.

Dear Thomas,

I couldn’t find any reports about this GSoC project. Probably, I didn’t search well. Can you direct me, please?

Thanks.