Hi Guys, On 21 December 2012 14:14, Toby Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Paweł Paprota <[email protected]> > wrote:> Sure, I'm not saying it's not useful, I just have a small problem > with > > naming since invalid geometry gave me *a lot* of headaches one time and I > > would prefer to have it very clearly documented. > > > > Ultimately it is up to you and/or Brett as the maintainer to decide how > to > > name it, I can always add some note to wiki documentation about this so > all > > in all it's not a big deal. > > Guess I never replied to this. I would have no problem changing the > name of the option. I just couldn't think of anything that makes sense > and is reasonably short. Suggestions? :) > > I was planning on adding this option to the detailed usage wiki page > with some text that hopefully explains things clearly. > I've just merged the change and pushed to the main git repo. I should have done it sooner but got distracted by Christmas. I would have done it a few days earlier except that I encountered test failures. I had to fix the db-snapshot.osm test data file as one of the changeset ids seemed to be incorrect. The tests are now passing, but let me know if I've done anything wrong. As for the name of the option, I don't mind too much. I'm personally happy to leave it as it is, largely because I can't think of a better name. I'd rather see efforts go towards improving its behaviour to detect more invalid ways than trying to more accurately name the option to describe its limitations. Brett
_______________________________________________ osmosis-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmosis-dev
