Clean-up of near-zero coordinates in graphical annotations

[DagBruck]

Minor clean-up of near-zero coordinates in graphical annotations.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you all sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
1 out of 2 committers have signed the CLA.

✅ tobolar
❌ Dag Brück

---

Dag Brück seems not to be a GitHub user. You need a GitHub account to be able to sign the CLA. If you have already a GitHub account, please add the email address used for this commit to your account.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[TManikantan]

@DagBruck can you please make changes suggested by @tobolar . Many Thanks

[arunkumar-narasimhan]

@DagBruck, would you like our help in addressing @tobolar's comments? These are minor suggestions that we could also help close if you are stressed for time.

[tobolar]

would you like our help in addressing @tobolar's comments?

It's not too much effort to change the code on our own and close the PR. But the reason why not to do it is that the Dymola's command/script shall be improved to catch also doubled coordinates in annotations.

I have fixed and commented some comments of me occuring several times. So only comments significant for the Dymola script's change are left.

[arunkumar-narasimhan]

would you like our help in addressing @tobolar's comments?

It's not too much effort to change the code on our own and close the PR. But the reason why not to do it is that the Dymola's command/script shall be improved to catch also doubled coordinates in annotations.

I have fixed and commented some comments of me occuring several times. So only comments significant for the Dymola script's change are left.

Thanks for the commits, @tobolar. I didn't want to overstep assignee's work that too without at least notifying the assignee. Appreciate the info on Dymola command/script feature. We will probe for second review.

[TManikantan]

@tobolar @hubertus65 kindly review the fix. This was necessary as new commits were made. Many Thanks...

[tobolar]

kindly review the fix

IMO, there are two options

1. fix my comments and merge or
2. wait for @DagBruck response.

[MartinOtter]

I would suggest to just accept the current status of the pull request and merge it.

[tobolar]

I would suggest to just accept the current status of the pull request and merge it.

Ok, I will fix the remaining models and we can merge then.

[TManikantan]

thankyou @tobolar . I guess its you who have to again review it. @tobolar @hubertus65 would you please approve the PR?

[MartinOtter]

Its not clear to me why "this commit cannot be built". Can someone help?

[hubertus65]

Looks good, thanks!

[hubertus65]

It looks like merging is still blocked since github doesn't know that Dag is with Dassault and that there is a signed cla. I think that by now all actual code changes have been by @tobolar, so that it should be possible to back out Dag's commits and retry. Not sure if anybody here can override this issue. @MartinOtter, any chance of moving this forward?

[tobolar]

I think that by now all actual code changes have been by @tobolar,...

Unfortunately, this doesn't apply. I've touched far less files then the initial commits of @DagBruck. No idea how to proceed.

[DagBruck]

It looks like merging is still blocked since github doesn't know that Dag is with Dassault and that there is a signed cla. I think that by now all actual code changes have been by @tobolar, so that it should be possible to back out Dag's commits and retry. Not sure if anybody here can override this issue. @MartinOtter, any chance of moving this forward?

This is confusing but to me the fastest way forward was for me to sign the CLA electronically, even though it out of principle should not be needed. So far I have not seen any change in the status of this pull request.