On 18 February 2013 15:34, Martin Landa <landa.mar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > 2013/2/18 Anna Kratochvílová <kratocha...@gmail.com>: >> I think there is no reason for that. Also, this g.mapsets -s is not >> really consistent with the new g.gui.modules. What about >> g.gui.mapsets? Or if we want to keep the flag -s, the code should be >> at least on one place. > > this `-s` flag is a historical artefact from G6 - `g.mapsets -s` > originally launch TCL/TK dialog (if GUI is TCL/TK). Having `g.gui.*` > modules, `g.gui.mapsets` makes probably more sense (drawback: one more > module introduced, backward compatibility broken - 's' flag removed) > than `g.mapsets -s`. In any case, code should be on one place, of > course. >
Hi, we can ignore backward compatibility issue if we decide that mixing modules with and without gui is simply wrong (I vote for non-mixing but we can do some wider discussion on that topic, of course). I'm afraid that we are not able to keep the number of g.gui.* modules small. For me the drawback is that as a user I have to thing about two different mapset modules. Generally speaking, there is no rule to determine which functionality is provided by the g.mapset(s) module and which by g.gui.mapset(s) module. > Martin > > -- > Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa > _______________________________________________ > grass-dev mailing list > grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev