Markus N wrote: > Can you demonstrate that things are significantly tested? I > don't see this.
a good example perhaps is the parallelization work that has gone into i.landsat.rgb and other shell scripts (in parallel with the python scripts in trunk). this is something which will be very useful for 6.4 users to have access to, but was introduced too late in the cycle to go into 6.4.3 with any confidence. ok, it doesn't pass the critical bug fix test, but a 4-6x speed up in a module is to be taken seriously. better that it sees some air in svn and shares the method than sit invisible on my local hard drive. another example I go back to all the time in my mind when thinking about stable software is a time some years ago when I used the release branch version of r.sun instead of the dev branch version in an effort to use only tested code in production runs. It turns out after a couple of months a new bug was found in the new development branch code, and fixed before the next stable release went out with the otherwise improved code. That choice literally saved me more than a month's worth of work when on a tight deadline, and was a lesson that sticks with me quite strongly. thanks, Hamish _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
