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
grass-user@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user

Reply via email to