[GRASS-dev] r34362, r34366

Hi,

re. area of https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/34362

is it really a good idea for us to be telling people to use "rm -rf"
in a main help page?? For one thing it's not portable, and for another
new users are reading that- I'd suggest for them to learn to do dangerous
things on their own time and we just say nothing. They'll all know how
to delete a folder, all we have to say is that they can do that without
worrying about breaking some registry. but let them source their own ammo.

re. https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/34366

fine for grass7, but please don't disable valid+working functionality in
devbr6. if you want to launch a gui window for it use "r.recode --ui".

thanks,
Hamish

Hi,

2008/11/19 Hamish <hamish_b@yahoo.com>:

re. https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/34366

fine for grass7, but please don't disable valid+working functionality in
devbr6. if you want to launch a gui window for it use "r.recode --ui".

well, I prefer to disable GRASS_UI_TERM in general (where is
possible). But maybe you are right (in terms of g6.x), if you prefer I
will revert this change.

M.

--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *

Hamish:

> re. https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/34366
>
> fine for grass7, but please don't disable
valid+working functionality in
> devbr6. if you want to launch a gui window for it use
"r.recode --ui".

Martin:

well, I prefer to disable GRASS_UI_TERM in general (where is possible).

it's added there, by hand, on purpose & for a reason. without it there
is no (obvious) way to get at that part of the module's functionality.

sure, the gui menu should use --ui in the menu entry for that module so
that a xterm isn't needed and there are not wingrass problems etc.

But maybe you are right (in terms of g6.x), if you prefer I will revert
this change.

for g6.x I prefer that it be reverted so the interactive functionality
is not (effectively) lost.

thanks,
Hamish

Hi,

2008/11/20 Hamish <hamish_b@yahoo.com>:

[...]

But maybe you are right (in terms of g6.x), if you prefer I will revert
this change.

for g6.x I prefer that it be reverted so the interactive functionality
is not (effectively) lost.

done in r34407.

Martin

--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *