[GRASS-dev] Planning GRASS GIS 7.0.0RC1

[Anna Petrášová]

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:43 AM, Moritz Lennert <
mlennert at club.worldonline.be> wrote:

> On 22/01/15 08:05, Markus Neteler wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Anna Petrášová <kratochanna at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Markus Neteler <neteler at osgeo.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, it is very difficult to predict the final release date. See here
>>>> for the undone backports which I have found (indeed, it is the task of
>>>> the respective developer to take care of that):
>>>>
>>>> http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/Grass7Planning#Planningongoing
>>>>
>>>> Excerpt:
>>>>
>>>> - Update Release/7.0.0RC1-News  <<- Should it become generic RC News?
>>>> - Update Splash screen
>>>> - Update Welcome screen
>>>>
>>>> To be backported:
>>>> - r64270 raster3d docs
>>>> - r64239, r64216 temporal docs
>>>> - r64226 XML (?)
>>>>
>>>> Relevant differences - to be clarified:
>>>> - various modules: %s= and %s= are mutually exclusive (r?)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am not sure what this last one means, do we know which modules is it
>>> related to?
>>>
>>
>> This change (and related) has not been backported so far (I understand
>> that it is a relevant patch):
>>
>> http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/60703
>>
>> 1. Consolite option/flag mutually exslusive messages.
>>
>> %s= and %s= are mutually exclusive
>> %s= and %s= are mutually exclusive. %s= will be ignored.
>> %s= and %s=/%s= are mutually exclusive
>> %s=, %s=, %s= and %s= are mutually exclusive.
>> %s=, %s= and %s= are mutually exclusive
>> -%c and %s= are mutually exclusive
>> -%c and -%c are mutually exclusive
>> -%c, -%c, %s=, %s= and %s= are mutually exclusive
>> -%c/-%c and %s= are mutually exclusive
>> -%c/-%c and %s=%s are mutually exclusive
>> -%c/-%c and -%c are mutually exclusive
>>
>> 2. Option(s) <opt>, ... => opt=, ...
>> 3. Flag(s) -f, ... => -f, ...
>>
>
> Shouldn't this be handled by the new exlusive / dependent / etc settings
> for the parser ? With a message from the parser in case of issues ?


Yes, they should. But I wouldn't change it to the new system for the
release, from my experience, you can easily make a mistake. But r60703
should be backported (just to avoid unnecessary differences between 70 and
71), I wanted to do that, but there were some conflicts, so I will look at
it later.

Anna

>
>
> Moritz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20150122/642159fa/attachment.html>