[GRASS5] GRASS 5.0.1 released

[Glynn Clements]

Markus Neteler wrote:

> > IMHO, anything which breaks backward compatibility with the previous
> > version shouldn't go in without a compelling reason.
> 
> Do you mean things like datum transformation etc.?

The usefulness of datum transformation might be considered a
compelling reason for including it. However, it might be worth
requiring the user to set a flag to enable datum transformation. 
Failing that, at least the release notice should contain a warning.

In general, any change which would result in a given sequence of
commands producing a different result should be avoided.

OTOH, adding new commands, adding new options, handling cases which
would previously resulted in an error, or "trivial" changes (such as
changing an error message or generating an error rather than a
segfault) are OK.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn.clements at virgin.net>