[GRASS-dev] testing results of r.watershed2 against old r.watershed

[Glynn Clements]

Glynn Clements wrote:

> In that regard, anything which is a derivative of existing code
> doesn't belong in grass-addons. If it's too radical even for 7.0, then
> it should go into its own branch, so that SVN *knows* that it is a
> branch of existing code.

Looking further, grass-addons is part of the same repository as grass
and grass-web, so in general it should be possible[1] to merge changes
between them.

However, this requires that the code was originally "forked" with "svn
copy", and r.watershed.fast appears to have been added whole, as if it
was original code (r.watershed2 was "svn copy"'d from
r.watershed.fast, but that's probably a bit late).

[1] "Possible" isn't necessarily the same as "easy", particularly if a
lot has happened since the fork. In general, it's better to merge
changes regularly. If you work on 7.0, you don't have to worry about
destabilising the exisiting code.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>