Il 12/04/2016 15:43, Thomas Schüttenberg ha scritto: > Within the German user community there is a discussion going on about how to > effectively support the fixing of several issues with some essential vector > geo-processing tools (e.g. intersection, clip, join attributes) that we think > have to work without flaws. [0] > But because of the modular structure of processing and tools in QGIS in > general, this topic can also be seen in a broader context. The ftools for > example have just been removed in favour of the processing tool box (QEP 36) > [1]. > So in order to make a good investment decision we would like to know, if > there are already further plans on your side to consolidate, rewrite or > replace (some) geo-processing tools in/for QGIS, which eventually also solve > these issues. Would it then make (more) sense to start a crowd funding > campaign for this - instead of funding short term fixes on maybe soon > deprecated code?
Hi Thomas, thanks for this. May I suggest to invest, first and foremost, in a complete set of tests for Processing? Having this will make it possible to constantly rely on Processing across versions; without it we always risk to get wrong or no results from our analyses. A testing infrastructure is already in place for some algs, what we need is a better coverage. The nice thing is that part of this job can be daone by power users, without have to rely uniquely on core developers. Sounds attractive? All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
