On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Maris Nartiss <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello all devs, > following recent movement into providing a greater transparency on > GRASS GIS analysis trustworthiness, I have created a first draft of > GRASS GIS errata framework proposal. > https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/RFC/5_Errata > > Everyone is invited to improve it and provide feedback to prepare > final proposal. > > At the moment there are two recent cases of GRASS GIS modules > providing reasonably looking but incorrect analysis results. They both > can be used as use-cases while evaluating need of such framework and > its content: > https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2917 > https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2969
I believe there is a third candidate: https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2820 v.surf.idw had 2 problems: from the ticket: Ok, found part of the problem: distance was always left as dy*dy + dx*dx without ever taking the square root. This obviously changes the weights as 1/10 is closer to 1/100 than 1/100 is to 1/10000... The second is more difficult to describe, both fixed in r67211 Using the -n flag gave correct results, otherwise the results were always wrong. The bug is present in GRASS 7.0.0 to 7.0.2. Anna > > > WBR, > Māris. > _______________________________________________ > 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
