Talk:Organic Maps

CoMaps page?

Is the new CoMaps project big enough yet to have its own page or should it remain as a part of the organic maps page? Pacrat173 (talk) 03:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Bit soon. Let the fork cook for a bit. The "notability" at the moment is that OM did get forked, not that CoMaps has become an established project — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 11:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I felt it was soon too but I just wanted to see what others thought Pacrat173 (talk) 16:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

The article is up, and now LWN wrote about it too. --Andrej Shadura (talk) 08:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Change of the software model as open-core

Should a change be considered for the app model since in the last days the most recent update of the server were hidden and the owners declared the server code "stolen" by CoMaps.
F-Droid has already moved and added the AntiFeature flag NonFreeAssets with the following description: "Compiled binary data files (including but not limited to `.mwm` map files) under a non-FOSS license".
This fits the description of open core because "The open-core model primarily involves offering a "core" or feature-limited version of a software product as free and open-source software, while offering "commercial" versions or add-ons as proprietary software", this is the description of the server with the basic features published and the updates purposely held back by the creators.

I'm open to corrections and opinions about my description and any other opinions about what and how could this change be made. GioPera06 (talk) 10:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I think a change to the tag line of the article and description would be accurate. I wonder if "open core" is correct though. If the maps and map generation aren't open and just the frontend is, it feels like it's nearly the opposite of "open core" and more "closed core, open UI"? Gedankenstuecke (talk) 11:49, 23 August 2025 (UTC)