You are correct about the redundancy. I was trying to make the change as minor
as possible. A somewhat better listing would be
GRASS GIS 7.8.5 (current stable)
GRASS GIS 7.6.1 (legacy) [change from “old”]
GRASS GIS 7.9 (preview) [“development” is OK, but “preview” sounds more
inviting for
+1
-jeff
--
Jeff McKenna
GatewayGeo: MapServer Consulting and Training Services
co-founder of FOSS4G
http://gatewaygeo.com/
On 2021-01-15 3:14 p.m., Helena Mitasova wrote:
I agree with Michael’s suggestion too, Helena
On Jan 15, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Paulo van Breugel wrote:
On Fri, Jan
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:12 PM Michael Barton wrote:
>
> You are correct about the redundancy. I was trying to make the change as
> minor as possible. A somewhat better listing would be
>
> GRASS GIS 7.8.5 (current stable)
>
> GRASS GIS 7.6.1 (legacy) [change from “old”]
>
> GRASS GIS 7.9
Am 15. Januar 2021 17:35:43 MEZ schrieb Michael Barton :
>On the new download pages, I just noticed that the dev versions are referenced
>like this:
>
>GRASS GIS 7.9 devel (unstable)
>
>This implies that GRASS 7.9 is risky and perhaps minimally useable. The
>reality is that it works very well
Hi,
If I may:
Devel (development) has wording redundancy.
What about7.9 snapshot (under development)
Regards from a lurker that admires the effort you guys put in.
Zoltan
Sent from BlueMail
On 15 Jan 2021, 21:21, at 21:21, Helena Mitasova wrote:
>I agree with Michael’s suggestion too,
I agree one word is better than two. Maybe just current.
Michael Barton
School of Human Evolution Change
School of Complex Adaptive System Science
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University
...Sent from my iPad
On Jan 15, 2021, at 9:35 PM, Vaclav Petras wrote:
On
Agreed, 'preview' is better.
Regards,
Zoltan
Sent from BlueMail
On 16 Jan 2021, 02:17, at 02:17, Markus Neteler wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:12 PM Michael Barton
> wrote:
>>
>> You are correct about the redundancy. I was trying to make the change
>as minor as possible. A somewhat
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 4:12 PM Michael Barton
wrote:
> You are correct about the redundancy. I was trying to make the change as
> minor as possible. A somewhat better listing would be
>
>
>
> *GRASS GIS 7.8.5 (current stable)*
>
>
>
> *GRASS GIS 7.6.1 (legacy) [change from “old”]*
>
>
>
>
Dear GRASS GIS community,
I am honoured to be nominated for the PSC.
I am a geographer (Dr.geog.) and self-taught programmer. My first
introduction to GRASS was around autumn of 2004 (5.x time). I remember
being fascinated by its 3D visualisation capabilities. I decided to
get to know GRASS
Dear All,
I feel very honored to be nominated for the PSC and really appreciate this
opportunity.
I started using GRASS in June 2000 for my Master's thesis, optimization of
a hydrologic model. I was using FreeBSD as my main operating system at that
time and had to go through a lot of hurdles to
On the new download pages, I just noticed that the dev versions are referenced
like this:
GRASS GIS 7.9 devel (unstable)
This implies that GRASS 7.9 is risky and perhaps minimally useable. The reality
is that it works very well but has some new features that might be buggy or
might change.
Hello GRASS community,
a big thanks to everybody who nominated me as a candidate for the next PSC term !
Over twenty years ago (1998) I discovered GRASS (4.2.1) to wrangle with weather radar data for a PhD project in South Africa. The PhD project led to one of first GRASS-centered
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 5:49 PM Michael Barton
wrote:
> On the new download pages, I just noticed that the dev versions are
> referenced like this:
>
>
>
> *GRASS GIS 7.9 devel (unstable)*
>
>
>
> This implies that GRASS 7.9 is risky and perhaps minimally useable. The
> reality is that it works
I agree with Michael’s suggestion too, Helena
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Paulo van Breugel wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 5:49 PM Michael Barton wrote:
> On the new download pages, I just noticed that the dev versions are
> referenced like this:
>
>
>
> GRASS GIS 7.9 devel
14 matches
Mail list logo
