Re: [Qgis-developer] About my plugins ...

[Tim Sutton]

Hi

I meant to reference Even too in my previous comments (in terms of agreeing 
with his comments). See below for more inline replies:



> On 16 Oct 2016, at 1:01 AM, Geo DrinX  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2016-10-15 15:59 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow  >:
> Thanks Even.  
> 
> Even is right. Security is the main reason that this is implemented this way, 
> there was loads of discussion around this when we put it in place.
> Trusted authors have auto approved plugins but until that point it requires 
> moderation by one of the team for now until a author gets to that point. 
> 
> I don't want to reduce the problem to a personal one, but I think that an 
> author, that is a programmer that reaches 171128 downloads, could be 
> considered trusted.

Roberto you are well known in the community and I think we know and trust you 
by now :-) 

> 
> But the problem is, instead, another, and I have a curiosity:  what is the 
> real danger you think can happens from an open gis ?   You really have 
> discussed this ?;)
> I don't think you are serious.
> 
> I have, instead a real problem you need to discuss:  You well know that there 
> is an important problem with SHP corruption.
> 
> True ?  I know this is true.  And also you know.
> 
> And, you know there is a "minidump" problem at exit, and randomically during 
> running.  And this problem is a memory problem.
> 
> True ?  You well know this is true.   Also I know that nobody knows from what 
> these bugs depend.
> 
> Well, I think the efforts and discussions must be used to discover these 
> problems, instead of plugin approvation, without any technical preparation.  
> Not ?
> 
> Or, if you need a responsibility to give, let it be python and the plugins.  
> But, you are out of road.  Look better in C++ source code, expecially where 
> memory pointers are not released, and used out of functions.  Perhaps.

I don't think it is good logic to say that we should ignore one known problem 
because another exists elsewhere. Rather we should address each problem as and 
when we can using the resources we have. Of course the things you mention above 
are worth fixing and the PSC makes donated funds to developers available 
exactly for the purpose of fixing these kind of issues. We also want to promote 
a plugin repository that contains code that won't remove all files from a 
user's hard drive or worse

So my summary is : don't take this personally, I think the things we are asking 
for are not unreasonable (given that dozens of plugin developers have already 
complied without complaint) and generally move us towards the direction of a 
better experience for our users and not away from it. OK? If you are still not 
happy, please rather frame the discussion in terms of specific concrete actions 
we can take to improve the plugin approval process, and we can work towards 
implementing them if possible. Thanks!

Regards

Tim


> 
> Good night
> 
> Roberto 
> 
> 
>  
> There might be other things we can do to increase the level of security 
> around this but these will also increase the level of complexity to the 
> system, signed packages, etc. This all takes times, and effort.
> 
> - Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Even Rouault  > wrote:
> Le samedi 15 octobre 2016 15:32:42, Geo DrinX a écrit :
> > 2016-10-14 8:42 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow  > >:
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Have you raised this as a issue with us. Can't really fix anything if
> > > it's not raised.
> > >
> > > What you suggest we do to make it better?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Nathan
> >
> > Well, good question.  I thank you for making me the question.
> >
> > My opinion is :  There is no need to have an approval process.  What is it
> > for ?
> > Who judges the job, maybe months, another programmer, who is giving to the
> > community that has developed because of its usefulness ?
> > Maybe Richard Stallman ?   By chance Gary Sherman  ?
> > Probably would not do it even they.
> >
> > I think right now the approval of the plugin is only a manifestation of
> > power.
> >
> > It is nothing but this.
> >
> > Imagine Wikipedia and prior approval.   It would be composed of only ten
> > pages.
> > Imagine OpenStreetMap. Only two roads.  Other than free map of the world !
> >
> > Make free plugins. As long as you are on time.
> 
> There's an important difference. Neither contributing *data* to Wikipedia nor
> OpenStreetMap involves security risk for users of those databases. On the
> contrary contributing a plugin to QGIS is contributing *code* that will run
> with the privledges of the user running QGIS, so potentially thefting data /
> destroying data / installing malware / doing whatever nasty you can imagine.
> 
> Making a plugin available in the default repository is like accepting a code
> contribution to QGIS 

[Qgis-developer] QGIS T-shirts designs for helping the QGIS project.

[Alexandre Neto]

Hi!

As a try to help QGIS project financially, I have created two designs
inspired in QGIS. You can turn those into T-shrts, hoodies, stickers, mugs,
etc... All profit from product sales will be for the QGIS project. I won't
keep any of it.

Please visit the site and, if you like it, grab some products.

www.redbubble.com/people/senhorneto/collections/567361-qgis?asc=u

I plan to add some more designs in the future.

Alexandre Neto
-- 
Alexandre Neto
-
@AlexNetoGeo
http://sigsemgrilhetas.wordpress.com
http://gisunchained.wordpress.com
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] About my plugins ...

[Tim Sutton]

Hi

Roberto I echo the comments from Victor and Nathan below - we are hosting 
executable code in the plugin repo and the approval process is only meant to 
protect our users and ourselves from people with malicious intent. The 
rationale is explained here:

http://blog.qgis.org/2016/08/26/what-are-trusted-plugins/

Note that the above article was heavily reviewed by myself and fellow members 
of the PSC before posting it. In my opinion we don't actually go far enough in 
the review process but unfortunately we don't have time and resources to do 
more. I think the review criteria are pretty minimal (contactable author, 
publicly hosted code, licensed under the GPL, not shipping binary blobs) etc. 
and should not prove to be a huge burden to any developer.

Could you share some specific ideas about how we could improve the process, 
whilst moving towards better security rather than away from it? Any reasonable 
and practical suggestions would be adopted without any issue I think...

Best Regards

Tim


> On 15 Oct 2016, at 4:59 PM, Nathan Woodrow  wrote:
> 
> Thanks Even.  
> 
> Even is right. Security is the main reason that this is implemented this way, 
> there was loads of discussion around this when we put it in place.
> Trusted authors have auto approved plugins but until that point it requires 
> moderation by one of the team for now until a author gets to that point. 
> 
> There might be other things we can do to increase the level of security 
> around this but these will also increase the level of complexity to the 
> system, signed packages, etc. This all takes times, and effort.
> 
> - Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Even Rouault  > wrote:
> Le samedi 15 octobre 2016 15:32:42, Geo DrinX a écrit :
> > 2016-10-14 8:42 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow  > >:
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Have you raised this as a issue with us. Can't really fix anything if
> > > it's not raised.
> > >
> > > What you suggest we do to make it better?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Nathan
> >
> > Well, good question.  I thank you for making me the question.
> >
> > My opinion is :  There is no need to have an approval process.  What is it
> > for ?
> > Who judges the job, maybe months, another programmer, who is giving to the
> > community that has developed because of its usefulness ?
> > Maybe Richard Stallman ?   By chance Gary Sherman  ?
> > Probably would not do it even they.
> >
> > I think right now the approval of the plugin is only a manifestation of
> > power.
> >
> > It is nothing but this.
> >
> > Imagine Wikipedia and prior approval.   It would be composed of only ten
> > pages.
> > Imagine OpenStreetMap. Only two roads.  Other than free map of the world !
> >
> > Make free plugins. As long as you are on time.
> 
> There's an important difference. Neither contributing *data* to Wikipedia nor
> OpenStreetMap involves security risk for users of those databases. On the
> contrary contributing a plugin to QGIS is contributing *code* that will run
> with the privledges of the user running QGIS, so potentially thefting data /
> destroying data / installing malware / doing whatever nasty you can imagine.
> 
> Making a plugin available in the default repository is like accepting a code
> contribution to QGIS core. That involves some form of trust in the
> contributor.
> 
> >
> >
> > geodrinx
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Geo DrinX  > > > wrote:
> > >> Good morning   :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I am here to inform you that I just removed from the repository the
> > >> latest plugin version 3.0.4 of GEarthView, and also other my plugins.
> > >>
> > >> I have taken this decision to draw your attention on the mechanism of
> > >> the plugin approval, which I think is totally insufficient and
> > >> inadequate.
> > >>
> > >> I recommend you review this procedure and pay more attention to whom is
> > >> dealing, which should be a technical, and not another.
> > >>
> > >> I am sorry for the difficulties that my decision will cause to
> > >> unsuspecting users of my plugin, but they can continue to download my
> > >> plugin from my official repository on github.
> > >>
> > >> I thank you for your attention
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards
> > >>
> > >> Roberto (geodrinx)
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> Qgis-developer mailing list
> > >> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org 
> > >> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer 
> > >> 
> > >> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer 
> > >> 
> 
> --
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> http://www.spatialys.com 
> 
> 

Re: [Qgis-developer] About my plugins ...

[Geo DrinX]

2016-10-15 15:59 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow :

> Thanks Even.
>
> Even is right. Security is the main reason that this is implemented this
> way, there was loads of discussion around this when we put it in place.
> Trusted authors have auto approved plugins but until that point it
> requires moderation by one of the team for now until a author gets to that
> point.
>

I don't want to reduce the problem to a personal one, but I think that an
author, that is a programmer that reaches 171128 downloads, could be
considered trusted.

But the problem is, instead, another, and I have a curiosity:  what is the
real danger you think can happens from an open gis ?   You really have
discussed this ?;)
I don't think you are serious.

I have, instead a real problem you need to discuss:  You well know that
there is an important problem with SHP corruption.

True ?  I know this is true.  And also you know.

And, you know there is a "minidump" problem at exit, and randomically
during running.  And this problem is a memory problem.

True ?  You well know this is true.   Also I know that nobody knows from
what these bugs depend.

Well, I think the efforts and discussions must be used to discover these
problems, instead of plugin approvation, without any technical
preparation.  Not ?

Or, if you need a responsibility to give, let it be python and the
plugins.  But, you are out of road.  Look better in C++ source code,
expecially where memory pointers are not released, and used out of
functions.  Perhaps.

Good night

Roberto




> There might be other things we can do to increase the level of security around
> this but these will also increase the level of complexity to the system,
> signed packages, etc. This all takes times, and effort.
>
> - Nathan
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Even Rouault  > wrote:
>
>> Le samedi 15 octobre 2016 15:32:42, Geo DrinX a écrit :
>> > 2016-10-14 8:42 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow :
>> > > Hey,
>> > >
>> > > Have you raised this as a issue with us. Can't really fix anything if
>> > > it's not raised.
>> > >
>> > > What you suggest we do to make it better?
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Nathan
>> >
>> > Well, good question.  I thank you for making me the question.
>> >
>> > My opinion is :  There is no need to have an approval process.  What is
>> it
>> > for ?
>> > Who judges the job, maybe months, another programmer, who is giving to
>> the
>> > community that has developed because of its usefulness ?
>> > Maybe Richard Stallman ?   By chance Gary Sherman  ?
>> > Probably would not do it even they.
>> >
>> > I think right now the approval of the plugin is only a manifestation of
>> > power.
>> >
>> > It is nothing but this.
>> >
>> > Imagine Wikipedia and prior approval.   It would be composed of only ten
>> > pages.
>> > Imagine OpenStreetMap. Only two roads.  Other than free map of the
>> world !
>> >
>> > Make free plugins. As long as you are on time.
>>
>> There's an important difference. Neither contributing *data* to Wikipedia
>> nor
>> OpenStreetMap involves security risk for users of those databases. On the
>> contrary contributing a plugin to QGIS is contributing *code* that will
>> run
>> with the privledges of the user running QGIS, so potentially thefting
>> data /
>> destroying data / installing malware / doing whatever nasty you can
>> imagine.
>>
>> Making a plugin available in the default repository is like accepting a
>> code
>> contribution to QGIS core. That involves some form of trust in the
>> contributor.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > geodrinx
>> >
>> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Geo DrinX 
>> wrote:
>> > >> Good morning   :)
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> I am here to inform you that I just removed from the repository the
>> > >> latest plugin version 3.0.4 of GEarthView, and also other my plugins.
>> > >>
>> > >> I have taken this decision to draw your attention on the mechanism of
>> > >> the plugin approval, which I think is totally insufficient and
>> > >> inadequate.
>> > >>
>> > >> I recommend you review this procedure and pay more attention to whom
>> is
>> > >> dealing, which should be a technical, and not another.
>> > >>
>> > >> I am sorry for the difficulties that my decision will cause to
>> > >> unsuspecting users of my plugin, but they can continue to download my
>> > >> plugin from my official repository on github.
>> > >>
>> > >> I thank you for your attention
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> Best Regards
>> > >>
>> > >> Roberto (geodrinx)
>> > >>
>> > >> ___
>> > >> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> > >> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> > >> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> > >> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>> --
>> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>> http://www.spatialys.com
>>
>
>
___
Qgis-developer 

Re: [Qgis-developer] About my plugins ...

[Nathan Woodrow]

Thanks Even.

Even is right. Security is the main reason that this is implemented this
way, there was loads of discussion around this when we put it in place.
Trusted authors have auto approved plugins but until that point it requires
moderation by one of the team for now until a author gets to that point.

There might be other things we can do to increase the level of security around
this but these will also increase the level of complexity to the system,
signed packages, etc. This all takes times, and effort.

- Nathan



On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Even Rouault 
wrote:

> Le samedi 15 octobre 2016 15:32:42, Geo DrinX a écrit :
> > 2016-10-14 8:42 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow :
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Have you raised this as a issue with us. Can't really fix anything if
> > > it's not raised.
> > >
> > > What you suggest we do to make it better?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Nathan
> >
> > Well, good question.  I thank you for making me the question.
> >
> > My opinion is :  There is no need to have an approval process.  What is
> it
> > for ?
> > Who judges the job, maybe months, another programmer, who is giving to
> the
> > community that has developed because of its usefulness ?
> > Maybe Richard Stallman ?   By chance Gary Sherman  ?
> > Probably would not do it even they.
> >
> > I think right now the approval of the plugin is only a manifestation of
> > power.
> >
> > It is nothing but this.
> >
> > Imagine Wikipedia and prior approval.   It would be composed of only ten
> > pages.
> > Imagine OpenStreetMap. Only two roads.  Other than free map of the world
> !
> >
> > Make free plugins. As long as you are on time.
>
> There's an important difference. Neither contributing *data* to Wikipedia
> nor
> OpenStreetMap involves security risk for users of those databases. On the
> contrary contributing a plugin to QGIS is contributing *code* that will run
> with the privledges of the user running QGIS, so potentially thefting data
> /
> destroying data / installing malware / doing whatever nasty you can
> imagine.
>
> Making a plugin available in the default repository is like accepting a
> code
> contribution to QGIS core. That involves some form of trust in the
> contributor.
>
> >
> >
> > geodrinx
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Geo DrinX  wrote:
> > >> Good morning   :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I am here to inform you that I just removed from the repository the
> > >> latest plugin version 3.0.4 of GEarthView, and also other my plugins.
> > >>
> > >> I have taken this decision to draw your attention on the mechanism of
> > >> the plugin approval, which I think is totally insufficient and
> > >> inadequate.
> > >>
> > >> I recommend you review this procedure and pay more attention to whom
> is
> > >> dealing, which should be a technical, and not another.
> > >>
> > >> I am sorry for the difficulties that my decision will cause to
> > >> unsuspecting users of my plugin, but they can continue to download my
> > >> plugin from my official repository on github.
> > >>
> > >> I thank you for your attention
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards
> > >>
> > >> Roberto (geodrinx)
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> Qgis-developer mailing list
> > >> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> > >> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> > >> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
> --
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> http://www.spatialys.com
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] About my plugins ...

[Even Rouault]

Le samedi 15 octobre 2016 15:32:42, Geo DrinX a écrit :
> 2016-10-14 8:42 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow :
> > Hey,
> > 
> > Have you raised this as a issue with us. Can't really fix anything if
> > it's not raised.
> > 
> > What you suggest we do to make it better?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Nathan
> 
> Well, good question.  I thank you for making me the question.
> 
> My opinion is :  There is no need to have an approval process.  What is it
> for ?
> Who judges the job, maybe months, another programmer, who is giving to the
> community that has developed because of its usefulness ?
> Maybe Richard Stallman ?   By chance Gary Sherman  ?
> Probably would not do it even they.
> 
> I think right now the approval of the plugin is only a manifestation of
> power.
> 
> It is nothing but this.
> 
> Imagine Wikipedia and prior approval.   It would be composed of only ten
> pages.
> Imagine OpenStreetMap. Only two roads.  Other than free map of the world !
> 
> Make free plugins. As long as you are on time.

There's an important difference. Neither contributing *data* to Wikipedia nor 
OpenStreetMap involves security risk for users of those databases. On the 
contrary contributing a plugin to QGIS is contributing *code* that will run 
with the privledges of the user running QGIS, so potentially thefting data / 
destroying data / installing malware / doing whatever nasty you can imagine.

Making a plugin available in the default repository is like accepting a code 
contribution to QGIS core. That involves some form of trust in the 
contributor.

> 
> 
> geodrinx
> 
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Geo DrinX  wrote:
> >> Good morning   :)
> >> 
> >> 
> >> I am here to inform you that I just removed from the repository the
> >> latest plugin version 3.0.4 of GEarthView, and also other my plugins.
> >> 
> >> I have taken this decision to draw your attention on the mechanism of
> >> the plugin approval, which I think is totally insufficient and
> >> inadequate.
> >> 
> >> I recommend you review this procedure and pay more attention to whom is
> >> dealing, which should be a technical, and not another.
> >> 
> >> I am sorry for the difficulties that my decision will cause to
> >> unsuspecting users of my plugin, but they can continue to download my
> >> plugin from my official repository on github.
> >> 
> >> I thank you for your attention
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Best Regards
> >> 
> >> Roberto (geodrinx)
> >> 
> >> ___
> >> Qgis-developer mailing list
> >> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> >> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

-- 
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] About my plugins ...

[Geo DrinX]

2016-10-14 8:42 GMT+02:00 Nathan Woodrow :

> Hey,
>
> Have you raised this as a issue with us. Can't really fix anything if it's
> not raised.
>
> What you suggest we do to make it better?
>
> Regards,
> Nathan
>

Well, good question.  I thank you for making me the question.

My opinion is :  There is no need to have an approval process.  What is it
for ?
Who judges the job, maybe months, another programmer, who is giving to the
community that has developed because of its usefulness ?
Maybe Richard Stallman ?   By chance Gary Sherman  ?
Probably would not do it even they.

I think right now the approval of the plugin is only a manifestation of
power.

It is nothing but this.

Imagine Wikipedia and prior approval.   It would be composed of only ten
pages.
Imagine OpenStreetMap. Only two roads.  Other than free map of the world !

Make free plugins. As long as you are on time.


geodrinx




> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Geo DrinX  wrote:
>
>> Good morning   :)
>>
>>
>> I am here to inform you that I just removed from the repository the
>> latest plugin version 3.0.4 of GEarthView, and also other my plugins.
>>
>> I have taken this decision to draw your attention on the mechanism of the
>> plugin approval, which I think is totally insufficient and inadequate.
>>
>> I recommend you review this procedure and pay more attention to whom is
>> dealing, which should be a technical, and not another.
>>
>> I am sorry for the difficulties that my decision will cause to
>> unsuspecting users of my plugin, but they can continue to download my
>> plugin from my official repository on github.
>>
>> I thank you for your attention
>>
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Roberto (geodrinx)
>>
>> ___
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] Access violation - no RTTI data

[Tom Chadwin]

OK, I didn't have the code which causes it quite right:

if isinstance(layer.rendererV2(), QgsCategorizedSymbolRendererV2): 
symbol = layer.rendererV2().categories()[0].symbol() 
print symbol.symbolLayerCount()

Outputs 1

However:

if isinstance(layer.rendererV2(), QgsCategorizedSymbolRendererV2): 
symbol = layer.rendererV2().categories()[0].symbol() 
print symbol.symbolLayers()

and:

if isinstance(layer.rendererV2(), QgsCategorizedSymbolRendererV2): 
symbol = layer.rendererV2().categories()[0].symbol() 
print symbol.symbolLayer(0)

both cause the RTTI error and QGIS to hang.




-
Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon 
--
View this message in context: 
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Access-violation-no-RTTI-data-tp5290830p5290834.html
Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] Access violation - no RTTI data

[Tom Chadwin]

Sure:

if isinstance(layer.rendererV2(), QgsCategorizedSymbolRendererV2):
symbol = layer.rendererV2().categories()[0].symbol()

It's here:

https://github.com/tomchadwin/qgis2web/blob/leafletRefactor/leafletScriptStrings.py#L376

To recreate:

1. Install the qgis2web leafletRefactor branch from Github

2. Open a point layer

3. Select a categorized renderer

4. Use an SVG marker instead of a simple marker

5. Start qgis2web

6. Click "Leaflet" to switch to Leaflet output

That triggers the error for me. Brief searching suggests something to do
with losing a reference to the canvas or ToC, or something. I'm on Win7 x64,
64-bit QGIS from OSGeo4W installer, 2.16.3 (also tried with an elderly
master2 - 0497e4a).

Any help gratefully received - I'm not experienced at debugging lower-level
issues than Python errors...

Thanks

Tom



-
Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon 
--
View this message in context: 
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Access-violation-no-RTTI-data-tp5290830p5290833.html
Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

[Qgis-developer] Access violation - no RTTI data

[Tom Chadwin]

What on earth does that mean when running a Python plugin?

Thanks

Tom



-
Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon 
--
View this message in context: 
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Access-violation-no-RTTI-data-tp5290830.html
Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] Crash wehn downloading models from on-line scripts collection

[Giovanni Manghi]

> A local issue, or someone confirms it on OSX?

as usual knowing the QGIS version used would have helped, anyway is
all fine on 2.16. On the other hand with 2.14 Processing won't load on
start, missing pyspatialite. So I installed it using pip, after that
Processing loads but there is indeed a crash when clicking on the tool
to download the scripts.

-- G --
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

[Qgis-developer] Plugin [757] Data Analysis and Visualization approval notification.

[noreply]

Plugin Data Analysis and Visualization approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[757] Data Analysis and Visualization 1.2 Experimental" is 
now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/dataexplorer/
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer