I agree. I am all in favour of choice, but less so for duplication. I would prefer one well design, well-documented tool rather than umpteen choices, Each of which I have to try out and evaluate.
I find that many of the tools are poorly documented , don't work intuitively or don't work at all. More and more I am turning back to Manifold GIS or my CAD program to accomplish things that should be easy to do inside QGIS. The open-source concept does have its strengths​ but coherence is not one of them. Too often the result is more like a camel rather than a horse ... Cheers . . . . . Spring Samsung Tab 4 On Mar 28, 2017 4:00 AM, "johnrobot" <johnro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > I do not want disable to all of the packages (GRASS etc), but I think that > it would improve the user experience if there are not as many as 13 tools > for buffering. We should be able to reduce this and I noticed that there > are > similar thoughts here, > https://hub.qgis.org/wiki/quantum-gis/Google_Summer_of_Code_2017. > > Magns > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6. > nabble.com/Processing-Duplicate-tools-for-reprojecting- > tp5312941p5314612.html > Sent from the QGIS - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-user mailing list > Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
_______________________________________________ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
