[GRASS5] The status of 5.0

[Markus Neteler]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 01:01:03AM +0000, David D Gray wrote:
[...]
> >>5. v.out.shape exported only closed polygons.  I found no way around that
> >>behavior.  Is that inherent in shape files?
> > 
> > Hi David...
> > 
> 
> This *should* produce a layer with area coverage, and one with line 
> coverage in separate shape-files if you use option `type=both', but I 
> can't recall if this functionality has ever been tested. I would think 
> it would have been working when the module was originally released, but 
> unused functionality tends to drift. Mostly you don't have combined 
> layers in GRASS files, even though it supports them, so maybe it is 
> another bug. I will be reviewing these export modules before final 
> release, though I give the import modules higher priority because they 
> really don't work at all.
> 
> As to the properties of shapefiles, it is confusing. The spec allows 
> each `shape' to have its own type defined independently, but AFAIK this 
> is not  yet (and probably now won't be) supported in ArcView, so 
> presumably most implementors avoid this. That is why the export for 
> GRASS was written to create layers in separate files.
> 

Hi David,

just curious: Are the SHAPE engine of GRASS (shape lib) and the SHAPELIB
in GDAL/OGR still in sync. At least they are not in CVS.
It might be a good idea to synchronize again as Frank Warmerdam and others
put some efforts into the SHAPELIB (frmts/shapelib in GDAL/OGR).

In general we may need a better solution how to deal with such important
libraries from 3rd parties. Hosting them as well in GRASS CVS will
tend to consolidate the non-synchronisation.

Markus