Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 4 July 2017 at 17:57, matteo wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > * barplot does not return a result (result viewer is empty) Looks like this happens when you don't pick a destination file. Can you re-test and explicitly choose an output file. >>> >>> tried,

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Il 04/07/2017 09:57, matteo ha scritto: > I notice that with all the algorithm that return html outputs, the > result viewer is empty and one can get the result just by saving the > output as local html in a folder. confirmed all the best -- Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu QGIS & PostGIS

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi Nyall, * barplot does not return a result (result viewer is empty) >>> >>> Looks like this happens when you don't pick a destination file. Can >>> you re-test and explicitly choose an output file. >> >> tried, still empty wpanel I notice that with all the algorithm that return html

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 19 June 2017 at 19:19, Giovanni Manghi wrote: > Using: > > The new native dissolve tool runs for a split second and outputs a few > polygons in vastly incomplete result. > > Trying to dissolve all polygons (and operation that the ogr2ogr based > tool does with no

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 10 June 2017 at 02:46, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > * there are two QGIS entries (I imagine one Py and one C++), confusing > for the user Fixed in master. Modeler should be 95% functional now - I'd love testing of this too! Nyall

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 20 June 2017 at 22:03, Giovanni Manghi wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > >>> and dissolving by "distrito" the ogr2ogr based tool is 2/3 seconds >>> faster than the new native one. >> >> For comparison, how long did each take in total? > > about ~28/29 seconds ogr and ~ 31/32

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi Nyall, >> and dissolving by "distrito" the ogr2ogr based tool is 2/3 seconds >> faster than the new native one. > > For comparison, how long did each take in total? about ~28/29 seconds ogr and ~ 31/32 native (on a testing VM with limited resources). > Hmm - works fine here. Can you try

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 19 June 2017 at 19:19, Giovanni Manghi wrote: > I waited a Windows osgeor4w master build that included your new native > c++ dissolve tool. > > I tested it (on the same platform and conditions) against qgis 2.18.9 > nightly, that also write debug output. > > Using >

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Il 19 giugno 2017 11:19:05 CEST, Giovanni Manghi ha scritto: >Hi Nyall, > >>> Our (hopefully friendly!) rivalry on this point continues :) I think >I >>> can win you over for 3.0 when we widely rollout the massive benefits >>> which are possible only in native algs,

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi Nyall, >> Our (hopefully friendly!) rivalry on this point continues :) I think I >> can win you over for 3.0 when we widely rollout the massive benefits >> which are possible only in native algs, such as the support for >> dynamic parameters. But we'll see >> > > By the way - I'd love to

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 14 June 2017 at 00:55, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > Il 12/06/2017 08:36, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > >>> * barplot does not return a result (result viewer is empty) >> >> Looks like this happens when you don't pick a destination file. Can >> you re-test and

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi Nyall, Il 12/06/2017 08:36, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: >> * barplot does not return a result (result viewer is empty) > > Looks like this happens when you don't pick a destination file. Can > you re-test and explicitly choose an output file. tried, still empty wpanel >> * basic statistics

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

> Yes, that's correct. glad to hear that. Thanks! Matteo ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe:

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 12 June 2017 at 17:41, matteo wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > I just have a quick question for the Processing C++ porting. Are all the > existing tests still valid for Processing and the test suite will remain > the same? > > I mean, if other people would like to do some tests

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi Nyall, I just have a quick question for the Processing C++ porting. Are all the existing tests still valid for Processing and the test suite will remain the same? I mean, if other people would like to do some tests in the future, is the method the same also after the porting is complete?

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 10 June 2017 at 02:46, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > Hi all, > I did some testing of new Processing commands, on a freshly compiled QGIS. > > * Aspect throws an error: > * barplot does not return a result (result viewer is empty) Looks like this happens when you don't pick a

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 10 June 2017 at 18:26, Nyall Dawson wrote: > >> it will be anyway preferred to native tools that frequently just >> return the wrong result (see several tickets >> on unions, intersections, differences and the alike). > > Our (hopefully friendly!) rivalry on this point

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Il 10/06/2017 10:28, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > I'll push some commits early next week to hide some of the known > broken algs, so that it should be safe to test and provide feedback on > all the visible ones. It's certainly appreciated! fine, so I'll keep on bothering :) is a message on the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 10 June 2017 at 18:09, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > Hi all, > > Il 10/06/2017 01:25, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > >> No - native QGIS one. None of the GDAL/OGR provider is ported to the >> new API yet and is not available in nightly builds. > > so it *should* work, right?

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 10 June 2017 at 10:05, Giovanni Manghi wrote: > Hi Nyall, > >> Native, GDAL, grass and saga will be ported. It's low on my priority >> list right now though, so if anyone wants to step forward and port >> these now then it'd be much appreciated. My priorities are: >>

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi all, Il 10/06/2017 01:25, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > No - native QGIS one. None of the GDAL/OGR provider is ported to the > new API yet and is not available in nightly builds. so it *should* work, right? should I keep on testing, reporting here or on the PR, or? > Native, GDAL, grass and

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi Nyall, On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On 10 June 2017 at 06:46, Giovanni Manghi wrote: >>> * Aspect throws an error: >> >> >> is this GDAL's aspect? > > No - native QGIS one. None of the GDAL/OGR provider is ported

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

On 10 June 2017 at 06:46, Giovanni Manghi wrote: >> * Aspect throws an error: > > > is this GDAL's aspect? No - native QGIS one. None of the GDAL/OGR provider is ported to the new API yet and is not available in nightly builds. > is expected that -for example- all the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

> * Aspect throws an error: is this GDAL's aspect? is expected that -for example- all the tools, even not QGIS native ones to be somehow fixed in processing/QGIS3 because of the overhaul that is going on? If yes this is also true for Processing plugins that make uses of external programs like

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3 > Processing: some test

Hi all, I did some testing of new Processing commands, on a freshly compiled QGIS. * Aspect throws an error: {'INPUT_LAYER': , 'OUTPUT_LAYER': , 'Z_FACTOR': 1.0} Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/src/qgis/QGIS/build_qgis3/output/python/plugins/processing/gui/Postprocessing.py",