[GRASS5] Update: 5.0.3-cvs -> 5.3.0-cvs

[Markus Neteler]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 01:24:19AM +1200, Hamish wrote:
> > The current (and desired) situation is now:
> > We have
> > 
> >  - 5.0.3 release_branch (RC3 at time, waiting for release)
> >  - 5.3.0-cvs: new PROJ engine, modified NVIZ, G3D updated
> >               tons of fixes
> >  - 5.7.0-cvs: former 5.1, new vector engine, DBMS support etc
> > 
> > The 5.7.0-cvs instructions should refer to 5.3.0, I tried to
> > update the relevant texts such as INSTALL etc.
> > 
> > Please make further updates if needed.
> > 
> > After getting 5.0.3 out of the door we should consider a
> > first 5.3.0 and also 5.7.0 release.
> 
> 
> I apologize for bringing up more meaningless version number debates,
> but why 5.3.0 and not 5.3.9? Why not 5.4.0pre1? 5.3.0 seems many
> releases away from 5.4.0 (even though the distance is meaningless).

I don't think that it is releases away.

> Is 5.4.0 really that far off? What's missing besides testing, testing,
> testing? Is there a list of critical bugs that need to be fixed before
> release? (e.g. NVIZ/Tk 8.4 on some systems; OSX & solaris build
> problems; r.terraflow CVS update) Is there any major missing
> code or subsystems?

The latest r.terraflow code I received yesterday via Helena. 
However, I hesitate to just copy over in CVS. Is there anyone
interested to try it first and then upload into CVS?
For the moment, the new src code is here:

 http://mpa.itc.it/markus/tmp/r.terraflow.1.5.tar.gz
 
> By the same argument, what's missing before a 5.7.0-experimental
> release and grass51 CVS moving to 5.7.1? (yes, code merge- wait just
> until 5.4.0 is out & thus in buxfixe only mode?) Is it too much to
> unwind the 'make mix' symlinks and make a source-only 5.7.0 release now?
> (I guess that means no CVS checkout of 5.7.0 and not a very good idea)

Right now I have added a 'srcdist' target which copies the linked 5.3.x files
into a 5.7.0-cvs src tarball:

make srcdist

and you are there.
 
> If we do a merge early before, 5.4.0 is out, applying changes to both
> trees is double the work, a pain, and bug prone. The sooner 5.4.0 is out
> and all new changes go to the 5.7 branch the better, I think.

I agree. And mainly motivated by the hope, that more developers switch
over to the 5.7 branch.


Best

 Markus