Hi, 2011/3/27 Hamish <hamis...@yahoo.com>: > - "Design GRASS toolboxes environment, see GRASS repository layout proposal > for detailed information. This would also include general clean up and > organization of existing GRASS modules in trunk and add-ons." > -> We can't dump a student into such a contentious area without coming > to some consensus on the design ourselves first. Personally I consider
This is right. > the breaking up of GRASS's 400 modules into a series of optional > toolboxes to be a massive mistake. GEM already exists, but no one wants > to use it, g.extention is at its core fundamentally a hack (I say as a > coauthor), etc.--there's still a lot of maturing of ideas to do. The > wiki addons page is getting rather long, but we aren't on the scale of > needing something like CRAN yet.. Discussion has been open by Jarek some time ago. (...) I really don't think that "it would be a massive mistake", moreover I think it would be "massive mistake" not organize currently available modules in trunk + addons to something more readable for GRASS users. Just my point of view, I believe I am not alone in the GRASS community (feel free to response). Anyway I will remove this idea from GSoC for now. Martin -- Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
