[GRASS-dev] Modules

[Brad Douglas]

Thank you for making my point.  That was essentially what I getting at
by "merging projects".  I was aware of previous discussions and was
pretty certain that it wouldn't ever happen.

No matter how painful it may be, GRASS needs its own method of
interactivity.  Coding it in a way that messages could be passed to and
from other GUIs would also be advantageous.  But there has been no
consensus on how to pass those messages (plain text, XML, raster or
vector map) and that has stopped me from rewriting some of the imagery
modules so that some of the display code can be deprecated (libvask
comes to mind).

Most of the existing interactive code can go away, but digitizing and
point selection *must* remain.

On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 09:06 -0700, Michael Barton wrote:
> But we are not, at least for an overall GUI. This was hashed out a year ago,
> including discussions of mergers (no interest in either group and different
> trajectories). 
> 
> IMHO, while digitizing is important, this one function doesn't seem a
> sufficient reason to scrap all the planning and work invested for continuing
> to evolve the main interface for GRASS when it is going according to plan
> and schedule--including work on a replacement digitizing module. As you've
> pointed out, an interactive interface is a very important component of a
> GIS. I don't think that depending on an independent, separate project to
> provide the primary user interface for GRASS is in the best interests of the
> project and its users.
> 
> Michael
> 
> On 2/21/07 2:52 AM, "Brad Douglas" <rez at touchofmadness.com> wrote:
> > And if we are going with QGIS, then it would be extremely beneficial to
> > both projects to discuss possible merger or at least coordination.


-- 
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                    KB8UYR/6
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785