[GRASS5] v.digit color name mismatch

[Radim Blazek]

On Monday 24 February 2003 05:00 pm, John Gillette wrote:
> This is good information to know.  I have been looking at vector
> processing modules also and have wondered if I was "wasting"
> my time by not looking at 5.1.  My concern is that what I do
> for 5.0 will change with 5.1.  These comments make it clear to me
> that I need to compile 5.1 and start looking at what's different.
>
> In particular, I have been looking in v.digit and v.build at
> topology building and checking routines to see how lower level
> routines can be used to build higher level functions.

Learning topology in 5.0 is not wasting time, topology is almost
the same in 5.1. Working on modules alredy updated to 5.1 
IS wasting of time, I think.

> It would be good if we can coordinate our work. Or at least share
> what areas we are working in. (I'm thinking specifically
> of the vector area.)

If anybody wants to contribute to 5.1, please write to this list or
to me before you start. I'll start to do the same, once I see 
that more people work on 5.1.

On Monday 24 February 2003 05:09 pm, Bernhard wrote:
> However we try to get 5.1.x out and stable as fast
> as possible which you probably should count in quarter of years.

The question is what may be released as 5.1.0, I think that it could 
be released when it contains most of vector+sites functionality
from 5.0. Say 90% of modules?

> We need people who fix bugs in 5.0.x and do maintance releases.
> Vector support is not bad in principle it just could be a lot better.

Unfortunately the system how categories are stored and then attached
to lines and points IS bad in principle. It is not reliable and correct 
data imported to 5.0 may lose it's attributes. That was why 5.1 was started.

On Tuesday 25 February 2003 02:39 am, Chris wrote:
> This may be a philosophic issue rather than a software issue. When I look
> at the Grass website I see the words "stable release" and "supported"
> associated with 5.0.0 and the words "highly experimental" and "use at you
> own risk" associated with 5.1.x. That is not going to encourage a quick
> transistion to the next version by the average user. 

Yes, and it will remain as it is if everybody says "it is not stable, I'll
work on stable". If you think that some hidden team of developers exists,
which will suddenly release stable 5.2, then that's not true.

> My guess is that many
> users are more interested in having a stable GIS even if the functions are
> limited than having ideal functionality with unknown stability. 

If you are improving v.digit/5.0 for other users than it is OK, I just 
worried that you want to use it yourself :)
I agree that stable is often better, however I don't think that v.digit is 
this case. Yes, many tools are missing in v.digit/5.1 but v.digit/5.0 is 
realy terribly inefficient. I think that everybody who wants to use v.digit 
more than one day, should consider
v.digit/5.1
v.out.ascii/5.1
v.in.ascii/5.0

Radim