[GRASS-dev] too many branches

[Doug_Newcomb at fws.gov]

+1

Doug Newcomb 
USFWS
Raleigh, NC
919-856-4520 ext. 14 doug_newcomb at fws.gov
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions I express are my own and are not representative of the 
official policy of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service or Dept. of the 
Interior.   Life is too short for undocumented, proprietary data formats.



Helena Mitasova <hmitaso at ncsu.edu> 
Sent by: grass-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
08/22/2012 07:11 PM

To
GRASS developers list <grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
cc
Markus Metz <markus.metz.giswork at gmail.com>
Subject
Re: [GRASS-dev] too many branches






After reading through the entire discussion I think even Hamish would 
agree that there is a broad consensus
that the number of branches needs to be reduced (as I read it, it should 
be grass64 and grass7)
and the sooner it is done, the fewer problems and confusion there will be.

It should also make it easier to test (I have 4 versions 6.4.2, 6.4.3, 
6.5, 7.0 on my machine and to be honest, I am not sure
what works in which version, but lately I have been using GRASS7 a lot so 
a release in near future would be welcome).

Helena

Helena Mitasova
Associate Professor
Department of Marine, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
2800 Faucette Drive, Rm. 1125 Jordan Hall
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
hmitaso at ncsu.edu

"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are 
sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records 
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.” 

On Aug 22, 2012, at 3:57 AM, Markus Metz wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> even the GRASS website [0] gets confused about all those branches.
> GRASS 6.4.3, the next stable release, is currently hidden under GRASS
> 6.4.2, current stable. Therefore there should be 4, not 3 sections:
> 6.4.2, 6.4.3, 6.5, 7.0. This is however IMHO too much, confusing for
> users and a maintenance burden for developers. The purpose of the
> existence of 6.5 is not clear to me, particularly since it is pretty
> much identical to 6.4.3. Using 6.5 as testbed for backporting does not
> make sense to me, I would prefer to use the current releasebranch as
> testbed for backporting (higher quality, hopefully, and faster bug
> fixing). IMHO, it would make maintenance much easier if one of 6.4 and
> 6.5 would go rather sooner than later.
> 
> Markus M
> 
> 
> [0] http://grass.osgeo.org/download/software.php
> _______________________________________________
> grass-dev mailing list
> grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20120823/f7695076/attachment.html>