[GRASSLIST:9478] Re: Rasters not displaying from old (Windows) Gr ass Projects

[Maciek Sieczka]

On śro, 2005-12-14 at 14:41 +0800, Chris George wrote:
> 
> Glynn Clements wrote:
> 
> > IMHO, the development version is no more or less likely to contain
> > bugs than a "stable" release.
> > 
> > It isn't as if the releases are the result of a concerted effort to
> > fix existing bugs without introducing new ones (as is the case for
> > some projects).
> 
> In which case GRASS is an unusual project.  I would hope that 
> maintainers did make an effort to thoroughly test stable releases,

I wish it was that easy. The truth is that Grass has limited man power.
Developers are doing what they can, but they don't have that much time.
They, usually, write software because they need it, they use it and
publish as is for the other folks to use it. This is cool. They are not
paid for it, with some exceptions and excluding what they gain being
Grass whizzes. They fix reported bugs, improve documentation - mostly
just because they are kind enough to care. Or if the bug/bad feature has
impact on their own work.

Grass needs more testing, that's true. And more programmers to fix
existing bugs and bad features. This needs more people (comitted users).
Those people who committ to Grass can't do it all alone.

I'm permanently surprised with the fact so many people use Grass, but so
few of them care to even report bugs. The ususall attitude of Grass
users _I know_ is - "Ouch, a bug. I'm sure devs will fix it." And they
are surprised it is not when the new release comes out. I have really
found many bugs in Grass which simply I can't believe were never noticed
before I did (sure I have also found several bugs which are not bugs at
all but that's another story ;) ).

Say, what can you do for your software? :)

>  and 
> restrict the work to bug fixes and bringing the documentation up to date 
>   in the period leading up to such a release.  Then users have a choice 
> between having something reliable and being able to try the latest 
> enhancements.
> 
> > As development proceeds, old bugs get fixed and new bugs get
> > introduced. The overall level of reliability will remain largely
> > constant. Beyond that, newer versions will have features which older
> > versions lacked (other than the fact that some features were removed
> > in the 5.x -> 6.x transition).
> 
> So why have releases like 6.0.0 or 6.0.1?  If all releases are equal in 
> status they are all just the cvs version at a particular date.

It is not really _that_ bad. There is the most advanced, but also the
most bug prone line, which is now the 6.1, because changes happen only
there. In the same time it always has the most detected bugs fixed, but
also the most of new ones, obviously.

There is also the stable 6.0.x branch which originates from the last
major release, the 6.0. The latest 6.0.x release, 6.0.1, contains only
bug fixes and documentation fixes, ported from the 6.1 line. There won't
be new functionality in 6.0.x branch. Hopefully, 6.0.2 will be released
with more fixes ported from 6.1. However, it is true that until then
actually you would be on a safer side using 6.0.x cvs snapshots than the
6.0.1.

> If GRASS hopes to keep a body of conservative users, whose data and time 
> are valuable, and for whom reliability is more important than the latest 
> enhancements, it needs to provide them with a reliable baseline system.

For me it looks like this is achieved. 6.0.x stable, 6.1 "unstable"
("" because I use it for production and feel pain when have to switch to
6.0.1 occasionaly on workstations maintained by my more conservative
colleague :) ). Some day 6.1 will be released and become the stable
line, 7.0 will take it's place. Fair enough for me.

> More radical users, more willing to take risks, or more interested in 
> experimenting, or who need a new feature, can take the risks if they wish.

Sure. But those brave ones are highly desired to test, and if they are
programmers, to help fixing bugs introduced within the development.
Other words - if you have a spare hour and care for Grass to be your GIS
software of choice, give 6.1 CVS a try and get back with any fixes, bug
reports or suggestions :). Same if you find any bug still breeding on
6.0.x.

> Please note I am trying not to make any value judgement between my terms 
> "conservative" and "radical".  I merely want to stress that both kinds 
> of user exist.  (Even, at different times, within the same person.)  I 
> also think, if GRASS is (or is to be) successful the conservative group 
> will be much the larger.  There is a danger with open source projects 
> that the enthusiastic few, who tend to be radicals, dominate and 
> undervalue the needs of the conservatives.

Your's conservatively radical,
Maciek