Hello Dave, I've understood the case and will fix that. I assume to make changes in a day or two.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Dave Stubbs <osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk>wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Anton Popov <apo...@cogniance.com> wrote: > > Hello Dave, > > > > We can split the logic for sure. I will refactor these two tasks. > > > > Speaking about delete actions, I can say I've ignored them expressly, > > because there is no big sense to transform(!) tags in entity, that will > be > > deleted. I'm new to Osmosis and if you will place arguments when my > > assumption can be wrong I can make changes for the code. > > > > > Yeah, they don't need transforming, that's fine. The issue is whether > they are being dropped from the ongoing change stream? The change > stream comes into the task via the process method, and the ongoing > stream leaves it via the call to the Sink.process method. So creates > and modifies will pass through the transform and only get piped to the > sink if the transform didn't drop it, but the deletes are never sent > to the sink, no matter what. > > As I said this was just me looking at the code, I'm fairly sure it's > wrong but haven't had time to test -- just put it through this use > case: create a changeset that includes a delete, then using a pass > through transform you should get the same changeset out the other end, > including the unaltered deletes. > > Dave > -- Best regards, Popov Anton. Senior Software Engineer, Cogniance Inc. Mobile: +380 68 358 52 13 Skype: popov.work Google account: Popov.UA.work MSN: popov...@hotmail.com ICQ: 461751798
_______________________________________________ osmosis-dev mailing list osmosis-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmosis-dev
