#498: r.sun2 out of sync / broken svn history ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------ Reporter: hamish | Owner: grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: 6.4.0 Component: Raster | Version: svn-develbranch6 Resolution: | Keywords: r.sun Platform: Linux | Cpu: x86-32 ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------ Comment (by hamish):
Replying to [comment:1 neteler]: > In r35938, r35939, r35940 (7, 6.4.svn, 6.4.0.svn) I have merged > pre-fork updates from old r.sun into r.sun2. cheers. > Replying to [ticket:498 hamish]: > > attack of the out-of-sync clones & another "svn copy" related > > tragedy. (granted it was added to svn some months ago, when > > we were all young about these things) MN: > No, the first tragedy. The "svn copy" ideal-world-solution came > up only after that. Yes, sh*t happens. Note that r.sun2 was > forked years ago and merging in changes of r.sun/GRASS took > already hours. Oversights are possible. whoa, I wasn't pointing that at you personally at all. sorry if it came across that way, it was meant as a general comment. I have spent too many hours merging stuff by hand to be anything but humble about it, and am certainly no svn expert at all. FWIW as the past example I was specifically thinking about the pain to merge years of here-and-there bug fixes between the four i.points clones some time ago. > TODO: understand usage of {{{ if (latin == NULL && lt == NULL && (G_projection() != PROJECTION_LL)) { }}} > > which yet differs. I will try and have a look. (just ran indent on r.sun2 to make it easier) also I wonder about r19184. r.sun2 has the <= part, so I lightly guess the 0.5 part of the patch has been considered & dropped?? Hamish -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/498#comment:3> GRASS GIS <http://grass.osgeo.org>
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev