On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 10:19 AM, GRASS GIS <[email protected]> wrote: > #2483: adding output to groups > > ---------------------------------------+------------------------------------ > Reporter: mlennert | Owner: grass-dev@… > Type: defect | Status: new > Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.1.0 > Component: Imagery | Version: svn-trunk > Keywords: i.maxlik, group, subgroup | Platform: Unspecified > Cpu: Unspecified | > > ---------------------------------------+------------------------------------ > > Comment(by mlennert): > > Replying to [comment:1 wenzeslaus]: > > I would ask for adding description of this and reasons for using > subgroups to manuals of the modules which are using them, so that it clear > to everybody. Note there was once an idea to remove subgroups as too > complicated but perhaps we just miss a better manual and explanations on > places where subgroups are used. Perhaps the other reason for removing > subgroups was that there is no consensus on how actually knows who to use > them. > > The general idea is that you have certain operations (georeferencing, > projection, export, etc) which you want to apply, for example, to all > bands of a satellite image, but other operations (classification, etc) > only to a limited selection.
Why not creating two different groups in that case? > You can thus have a group that combines all > bands and subgroups that you can create for any specific needs. > > I like this feature, but there might be a better way to solve this, and > thus get rid of subgroups if they are deemed to be more of a nuisance. > > Moritz > > -- > Ticket URL: <https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2483#comment:2> > GRASS GIS <http://grass.osgeo.org> > > _______________________________________________ > grass-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
