[GRASS-dev] Location wizard (missed window to select +towgs
params)
Paul Kelly
paul-grass at stjohnspoint.co.uk
Mon Mar 15 11:10:35 EDT 2010
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Markus Neteler wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Hamish <hamish_b at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Paul wrote:
> ...
>>> I haven't had time to test reverting the CSV files yet but
>
> (I wonder how CSV files could mess up a logic but how knows...
> Of course let's revert in 6.4 if this breaks things)
Hi Markus, After reading Frank's blog post (thanks for the link) I
understand - simply the CSV files now contain datum transform parameters
for all the datums that previously had no parameters specified because
there was a choice, and as Frank said he thought it best to force the user
to make a decision - this suited GRASS very well since as Hamish mentioned
the decision only needs to be made once, when setting up a new location,
and it is no trouble to take a few extra minutes to determine what is the
best choice.
> (it also reminds me of my suggestion to leave all this business
> to GDAL instead of having a potentially conflicting private
> solution, but of course one can see it also the other way round)
Yes I definitely plan to do that in 7.x, but I note that the problem would
have been the same, except it would presumably have appeared more
noticeably after an upgrade to GDAL.
>>> if that works I would suggest doing it, as if that is going
>>> to be the way GDAL works from now on it will require quite a
>>> few changes to how g.proj works, and it is much too late in
>>> the release cycle of 6.4.0 to go changing things there...
>
> Sure. Note: if so, it is the first time that CSV updates really break
> the mechanism in GRASS.
>
>> hmmm +file lib/proj/datum_shift.csv
>> in https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/41248
>>
>> see also r41223.
I can confirm that
svn merge -c -41248 .
fixes 6.4 release branch. Any opinions on whether we should also revert
r41223, or should I just commit the reversion now?
Paul
More information about the grass-dev
mailing list