Hi, 2015-12-21 15:33 GMT+01:00 Vaclav Petras <[email protected]>: > I think this is too risky. If I understand it correctly, it puts all the GUI > modules/packages on path. So, one will get:
right. > Considering the amount and naming, it is likely to get name collision. This > will happen even if the caller doesn't have any interest in GUI. > > Simple way to solve this would be adding GUI to path optionally by a > parameter or by providing a separate function. I used just for now the simple way (r67308). > Better way to solve this is probably putting GUI modules/packages to a > bigger package. Let's say grassgui, or perhaps grasswxgui. Another option is > to have grass.wxgui package. In this case, putting things to etc/python/ > would be mandatory, in the other cases it is optional. Assuming that the most of users will need only to run g.gui.* modules via run_command() it would be probably enough to add path check to the every g.gui.* module... Ma -- Martin Landa http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/gwiki/Landa http://gismentors.cz/mentors/landa _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
