[GRASS5] grass5.1 directories proposal

Radim Blazek Radim.Blazek at dhv.cz
Mon Jan 8 03:55:57 EST 2001

Andreas Lange wrote:
> With a setup similar to this the import/export could be made much
> simpler without rewriting every module and/or writing a monolithic
> "exchange" program. Every programmer could concentrate on the file
> format he knows best.
I agree.
> I vote against a new import-export directory.
> Why not keep the modules in the original raster/vector/sites directory
> and flag the functionality (import/export) by another system
> (xml-description, textfile somewhere ...)
I agree.

> Again i would vote for another system to track the functionality
> (interpolation, ...). See above.
> The core modules should go to :
>   core/raster
>   core/vector
>   core/sites etc.
I agree.

> The unused directory should be keept with the old GRASS5.0 code, but is
> not needed for the new GRASS5.1 tree.
I agree.

> >  - Idea: The raster database structure should be changed to the G3D
> >    structure: all files related to a raster map should go into one
> >    directory. Currently many files are spreaded in many directories.
> >    An example for the G3D data structure can be found here:
> >    http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/grass/grid3d/index.html (sample dataset)

New vector?:
MAPSET/vector/vector_name/coor  (binary file)  - (former dig/)
                         /head  (text file)    - (head of former dig/)
                         /topo  (binary file)  - (former dig_plus)
                         /cats  (text file)    - (former dig_cats)

Please suggest better file names (short).


If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo at geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

More information about the grass-dev mailing list