[GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2846: g.gui.rlisetup: show where new config file is created
GRASS GIS
trac at osgeo.org
Mon Jan 4 07:18:01 PST 2016
#2846: g.gui.rlisetup: show where new config file is created
--------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter: hellik | Owner: grass-dev@…
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.0.4
Component: Raster | Version: svn-releasebranch70
Resolution: | Keywords:
CPU: Unspecified | Platform: Unspecified
--------------------------+---------------------------------
Comment (by mlennert):
Replying to [comment:4 hellik]:
> Replying to [comment:3 lucadelu]:
> > Replying to [comment:2 mlennert]:
> > > Replying to [ticket:2846 hellik]:
> > > > it would be nice if there would be an information of the whole
path to the file which could be copy/paste as input to the r.li.*-modules.
> > >
> > > You should not use the absolute path in the r.li.* modules. Just the
file name. You can list existing files with g.gui.rlisetup. So, normally,
no need to see the absolute path.
> > >
> >
> > I confirm this
> >
> > > However, ascii output files are also stored in the same path, and
this is a bit more of a nuisance as you then have to navigate there to
find the file. I imagine (but haven't checked) that this was done to
ensure that any other r.li.* module can potentially, easily find the ascii
output of another, but are there many modules that read this kind of
output ?
> > >
> >
> > Maybe you can open an enhancement ticket for this?
> >
> > Can I suggest to close this ticket as invalid? I think it is better to
use g.gui.rlisetup to create or modify the r.li configuration files.
>
> What kind of invalid is to show the path to config (and maybe the
output) files?
I think that a message with the full path will give the illusion that this
is what users should use, while what they actually should use is just the
name. Maybe to make that even clearer, the r.li.* modules should provide a
dropdown list of available config files (such as the list of signature
files you can get in i.maxlik). Again, something for an enhancement
ticket.
So, maybe invalid is a bit harsh, and wontfix is better, but I agree with
Luca on the conclusion.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2846#comment:5>
GRASS GIS <https://grass.osgeo.org>
More information about the grass-dev
mailing list