On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 7:39 PM Markus Metz
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 10:15 AM Martin Landa wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > pá 8. 11. 2019 v 8:22 odesílatel Markus Metz
> > napsal:
> > > > I will try to reword my question. Are you aware of any related
> > > > blockers which should avoid us
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 10:15 AM Martin Landa wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> pá 8. 11. 2019 v 8:22 odesílatel Markus Metz
> napsal:
> > > I will try to reword my question. Are you aware of any related
> > > blockers which should avoid us packaging upcoming GRASS 7.8.1 with
> > > GDAL3/Proj6? Thanks for
Hi,
pá 8. 11. 2019 v 8:22 odesílatel Markus Metz
napsal:
> > I will try to reword my question. Are you aware of any related
> > blockers which should avoid us packaging upcoming GRASS 7.8.1 with
> > GDAL3/Proj6? Thanks for clarification! Martin
>
> No, that's the only bug I found so far.
thanks
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:39 PM Martin Landa wrote:
>
> Hi Markus,
>
> čt 7. 11. 2019 v 19:50 odesílatel Markus Metz
> napsal:
> > yes, EPSG:3857 is causing trouble. This is the WGS 84 / Pseudo-Mercator
projection on a sphere with radius 6378137 that needs special treatment
which no longer works
> Indeed messy. Look at the WKT2 representation of projinfo -o WKT2_2018
> EPSG:3857: projection on the ellipsoid "WGS 84", not on a sphere.
as does the authority says:
https://www.epsg-registry.org/export.htm?wkt=urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG::3857
> I don't understand "lying on the ellipsoid definition
Hi Markus,
čt 7. 11. 2019 v 19:50 odesílatel Markus Metz
napsal:
> yes, EPSG:3857 is causing trouble. This is the WGS 84 / Pseudo-Mercator
> projection on a sphere with radius 6378137 that needs special treatment which
> no longer works with GRASS + PROJ 6 + GDAL 3.
I will try to reword my
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 8:04 PM Even Rouault
wrote:
>
> On jeudi 7 novembre 2019 19:50:33 CET Markus Metz wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 6:47 PM Martin Landa
wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > čt 7. 11. 2019 v 15:17 odesílatel Markus Metz
> > >
> > > napsal:
> > > > PROJ 6 support is not yet
On jeudi 7 novembre 2019 19:50:33 CET Markus Metz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 6:47 PM Martin Landa wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > čt 7. 11. 2019 v 15:17 odesílatel Markus Metz
> >
> > napsal:
> > > PROJ 6 support is not yet finished in GRASS. Currently it sort of works
>
> in master and relbr78,
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 6:47 PM Martin Landa wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> čt 7. 11. 2019 v 15:17 odesílatel Markus Metz
> napsal:
> > PROJ 6 support is not yet finished in GRASS. Currently it sort of works
in master and relbr78, but I expect troubles because GRASS is heavily
relying on deprecated proj
Hi,
čt 7. 11. 2019 v 15:17 odesílatel Markus Metz
napsal:
> PROJ 6 support is not yet finished in GRASS. Currently it sort of works in
> master and relbr78, but I expect troubles because GRASS is heavily relying on
> deprecated proj strings as CRS definitions. This is becoming problematic e.g.
PROJ 6 support is not yet finished in GRASS. Currently it sort of works in
master and relbr78, but I expect troubles because GRASS is heavily relying
on deprecated proj strings as CRS definitions. This is becoming problematic
e.g. when creating locations from GDAL/OGR datasets because GRASS goes
> The (my) idea is that proj suggests reasonable paths to store grids, search
> paths should be available in PJ_INFO. Otherwise applications may decide for
> a directory specific to that application, not generally valid for proj used
> by different applications. Applications can then check the
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:55 PM Even Rouault
wrote:
>
> On mercredi 25 septembre 2019 22:47:21 CEST Markus Metz wrote:
> >
> > PROJ6 will not use the best method if any required datum transformation
> > grid is not available. Users will need to obtain the corresponding grid
> > themselves, which
On mercredi 25 septembre 2019 22:47:21 CEST Markus Metz wrote:
> Several different methods might be available to reproject from one CRS to
> another CRS. PROJ6 can select the most appropriate method if a bounding box
> is provided. This means that the selected method depends on the bounding
> box
Several different methods might be available to reproject from one CRS to
another CRS. PROJ6 can select the most appropriate method if a bounding box
is provided. This means that the selected method depends on the bounding
box and that results of a reprojection can differ depending on the provided
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 6:01 PM Markus Neteler wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:31 AM Anna Petrášová
wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:22 AM Markus Metz <
markus.metz.gisw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> there is a new PR for PROJ6 support in GRASS
> >>
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:31 AM Anna Petrášová wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:22 AM Markus Metz
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> there is a new PR for PROJ6 support in GRASS
>> https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/pull/118
>>
>> There are two important changes when using PROJ6:
>>
>> First,
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:22 AM Markus Metz
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> there is a new PR for PROJ6 support in GRASS
> https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/pull/118
>
> There are two important changes when using PROJ6:
>
> First, reprojection with v.proj and r.proj is no longer always possible
> without
Hi all,
there is a new PR for PROJ6 support in GRASS
https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/pull/118
There are two important changes when using PROJ6:
First, reprojection with v.proj and r.proj is no longer always possible
without the user making informed decisions. The reason is that there can be
19 matches
Mail list logo
