[GRASS5] Proposal for a new GRASS directory structure

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 10:17:49AM -0400, Eric Mitchell wrote:
> Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> 
> > Yes, grass-base and then thematic packages would be nice.
> > nviz is 3D and even has other requirements (OpenGL/Mesa).
> 
> What other thematic packages would make sense?  I'm not 
> really a GIS whiz, I just like making maps of places I've
> hauled my consumer grade GPS receiver with me. =)  The
> trick is acheiving a reasonable balance between one source
> tarball with everything, and one source module for each 
> binary.  I'm not sure where to draw a reasonable lines 
> between those two extremes.

We should discussion this.
We need to seperate extra packages, which are not needed by the casual
users. I guess that some of the contrib stuff certainly falls under
this.


Remote sensing image processing would make up a package.
Some people just do not orthorective or classify images.

> > > My recommendation
> > > for dealing with the reorganization in the CVS repo, is to declare
> > > the current tree dead, and reimport the source in the reorganized
> > > layout somewhere new in the repository.  You can still get the old
> > > information if necessary, but moving files around a cvs repository
> > > tends to be a pain.
> > 
> > This might work. But this is also the time to do a more radical
> > cleanup and we can only do that on the development tree.
> > Even major source code reorganisation should IMO not done in a beta
> > phase of a project.
> 
> When I speak of reimporting the source as a new tree, I don't mean 
> reorganizing the development branch.  I mean declare all branches
> in the current source base "dead", and create a new cvs module, say
> "grass-reorg" (aliased to "grass", of course) that is organized 
> with everything in the right and proper place.  Under that top 
> level module, could be modules corresponding to the various thematic 
> packages for ease of making tarball releases.  That way, if you 
> check out "grass", you get everything, but you could still just
> check out "grass-base" and "grass-nviz" if that's all you needed.

Yes I think that I understood.
Though I still prefer to do this, when we have a stable and
a development tree. Right now there is only a stable tree.
I expect there will be more code reorganisation than just moving 
files around.

	Bernhard


-- 
Professional Service around Free Software                (intevation.net)  
The FreeGIS Project				            (freegis.org)
Association for a Free Informational Infrastructure            (ffii.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 236 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20000912/ba7a36fa/attachment.bin