Hamish wrote: > > FWIW, I'm planning to remove ps.map from 7.x. > > > > Equivalent functionality will be available through d.* > > commands. > > any reason other than redunancy?
Partly redundancy, mainly to ensure that people complain about any deficiencies with the alternative. > It is highly useful to some and currently outpaces d.* for quality. Just about anything currently outpaces d.* for quality. That will change once the graphics architecture is re-written. > Duplicate functionality is only a reason if: > > a) it does a worse job for the task (debatable->personal choice), or > b) it distracts the developer pool too much from working on new things. > c) adds too much bulk The main reasons are b) and: d) it distracts the user pool from testing new things. Essentially, if ps.map is left, it will "steal" both developers and testers from d.*, which (AFAIK) is still the primary mechanism for graphics. [Unless you're planning on entirely replacing d.* with ps.map, in which case ps.map is going to have to become a great deal simpler (code-wise) and more flexible.] -- Glynn Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list email@example.com http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user