[GRASS-dev] Planning GRASS GIS 7.0.0RC1

[Vaclav Petras]

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Markus Neteler <neteler at osgeo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Markus Neteler <neteler at osgeo.org>
> wrote:
> >> >> If I turn the tests into a test suite script, I will use a vector
> from
> >> >> the the full version of the North Carolina sample dataset. Is this
> ok?
> >> >
> >> > This is ok. MarkusN says we should use the new dataset but I think it
> is
> >> > not
> >> > yet stable.
> >>
> >> I would invite everybody to switch to these simplified names:
> >> http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/SampleDataset
> >>
> >> At page bottom download the dataset (done by Helena).
> >
> >
> > Is it stable enough?
>
> What is "stable"? The names, the size of the package or the selection of
> maps?
>
> Naming, selection and placement into mapsets.


> > Anyway, first we have to solve the challenge of having
> > the maps in different mapsets. How do you get them in examples and tests?
> > Use name of mapset? Or expect everything to be on path?
>
> Probably a simple "g.mapsets" call would be enough to get it in.
>
> Switching of mapset is not applicable in tests (tests are isolated using
GRASS means, i.e. processes and mapsets) but yes, changing path is the way.
Do you think we should add it to each example which needs it? For tests it
would be quite easy to do something like set up the search path
automatically according to existing mapsets or search path set in PERMANENT
but it is desired? I don't have a strong opinion, explicit g.mapsets calls
sounds as a safe way to go but putting @mapsetname everywhere would also
work, am I right?

> Once we decide to switch (for example in 7.1/trunk) we should do it
> > officially, so we avoid the unclear situation caused by full NC and
> basic NC
> > where the locations were incompatible and it was not defined which one to
> > use.
>
> I haven't used NC basic at all but would be happy to replace (all) my
> examples from full NC with the simplified names.
>
> It's completely the same for me.


> > Which data you use when running the tests on you computer is your
> choice, so
> > you can experiment with any dataset and develop your tests with the
> dataset
> > which will be used in the future.
>
> Yes but the point is that we need to switch to the simplified names as
> suggested by Helena (maybe with your collaboration in your lab):
> http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/SampleDataset
>
> At this point I could update the "Piemonte" location (also on the Web
> site) accordingly.
>
> Replacing the old one by a new one on my server should be quite simple
because it is already there. Same if we decide to just use new NC instead
of currently used full NC. Adding new location is what is very unpleasant
to do now.


> > I might be able to improve location handling in tests next month, or at
> > least add the new NC and basic NC locations to my test server to
> accommodate
> > the different tests (before the situation will stabilize).
>
> I am not sure what we are waiting for.
>
> If it is stable enough for trunk (i.e. it is worth to modify examples and
tests) and it is clear how to access the maps in other mapsets then we just
have to announce the official switch. Will this be the default dataset for
7.1 then?

Vaclav

Markus
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20150119/1607bc15/attachment.html>