[GRASS-dev] Re: [GRASS-SVN] r49486 - grass-addons/grass6

Hamish hamish_b at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 2 20:19:51 EST 2011

> > Author: hamish
> > Date: 2011-12-02 02:38:18 -0800 (Fri, 02 Dec 2011)
> > New Revision: 49486
> >
> > Added:
> >   grass-addons/grass6/raster
> > Log:
> > test to see how well trac deals with symlinks. > > should appear in unix as a symlink, on MS
> > Windows as a regular file

> I think that it would be better just to move such
> dirs to `grass6`.

After reviewing this experiment I'm thinking the
same thing.

And that we should do it before releasing 6.4.2
with its (hopefully) working-for-everyone release
of g.extension.[*]

> It would require to update URL in g.extension and
> GRASS Addons Wiki page.

(and web search for others, but the new spot is
logical enough to make discovery easy for any we

> No big problem. The major advantage would much
> more clean grass-addons repo with root
> directories for grass5, grass6 and grass7,
> tools, etc.


> Such symlinks just makes this repo more messy.

just exploring the idea to see how it showed up
in trac: Symlinks show up in trac just as they
would on Winodws AFAIU, just a 1 line text file
which says "link ../raster". So it does not help
with web redirects to the old trac browser or
'svn checkout|export' location.

[*] also before releasing 6.4.2 and locking in
problems, I would like to clean out the install
cruft in the addons dir. quoted from trac #1501:

"with an empty (or non-existent) addons dir could you try editing line 412 of grass 6.5's g.extension to be [ 0 -eq 1 ] and installing a few addon modules? After seeing it I hope you agree it is a much cleaner way to organize things. If there is a technical reason not to clean that up I'd still like to hear what it is, as I know of none."


More information about the grass-dev mailing list