[GRASS-dev] Re: [GRASS-user] v.trees.3d and gem

[Hamish]

Benjamin Ducke wrote:
> I propose removing GEM from GRASS 6.4. It's done some good job as a
> development tool for me, but as a user tool, it only creates confusion,
> like in this case. Plus, after several years, not a single
> GEM-installable extension has ever surfaced (apart from the stuff along
> side which I originally developed GEM).

I would ask to keep it, the code works and there is nothing fundamentally
wrong with it. Like the SWIG interfaces, even if it is not used by most
users it will be super important for a few. At worst it's a nice bullet
point for the managers to consider.

It is not costing us much in the way of maintenance effort. If we keep
it in SVN but disable it in the Makefile I fear it will quickly go stale
and non-functional.

By its nature 3rd parties may be using it in-house and not letting us know.
Who knows how it will be used in the future? I have quietly hoped that
Yann might package up his suite of GIPE addon modules as a GEM package
for the inaugural extension.


I think what is needed is to better document it at the top of the Wiki
Addons page... 

If the problem is confusion then the solution is better communication,
not changes to the code and available functionality.

If the problem is limited uptake, a solution could be a new / better
advertised reference example.  e.g. a "g.swig" hello world module.


2c,
Hamish