On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:21 AM, <grass-dev-requ...@lists.osgeo.org> <grass-dev-requ...@lists.osgeo.org
> wrote:
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 12:21:17 +0100
From: "Martin Landa" <landa.mar...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GRASS-dev] 6.4rc1
To: Hamish <hamis...@yahoo.com>
Cc: grass-dev <grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org>
Message-ID:
<f8fe65c40812180321x5f978efqda73bb9c9a67e...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi,
2008/12/1 Martin Landa <landa.mar...@gmail.com>:
2008/12/1 Hamish <hamis...@yahoo.com>:
so what remains todo befor 6.4rc1? IMO lib API and module list
should be
frozen at that point, which means creating releasebranch_6_4. No
need to
I also added to the list nviz_cmd module. I am not sure about its
name. Any ideas?
nviz.cmd
I remember votes for d.3d and votes again this proposal. Any consensus
before rc1? Personally I have nothing against d.3d. One of the options
would to rename d.nviz to something else, e.g. d.nviz.fly and d.nviz
use for nviz_cmd(?)
d.* commands produce a visualization in a display window. d.nviz seems
the obvious one, though I don't have any objections to d.3d either.
The current d.nviz is really intended to create a fly-through path for
nviz--interactively or non-interactively. It won't work interactively
on anything but an xterm, so d.nviz is kind of a misnomer. We don't
have a prefix for 3D modules, thought maybe we should think of one.
Lacking that, nviz.flythough is the most accurate description, or
perhaps v.nviz.flythrough since you set (sort of) vector points to
create the path.
Michael
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
