Plugin Planet_Explorer approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[1904] Planet_Explorer 1.2" is now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/planet_explorer/
___
QGIS-Developer mailing list
QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info:
Plugin Azure Maps approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[1902] Azure Maps 0.2 Experimental" is now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/QGISPlugin/
___
QGIS-Developer mailing list
QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info:
Plugin PDOK BAG Geocoder approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[324] PDOK BAG Geocoder 0.6.5 Experimental" is now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/pdokbaggeocoder/
___
QGIS-Developer mailing list
QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info:
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 22:20, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>
> On 12/9/19 12:00 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 20:10, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
> >> Thanks for the clarification Andreas, indeed there was a misunderstanding
> >> on my end.
> >>
> >> That's admittedly a pain point with GPKG,
Hi Raymond,
I won't be at the hackfest this time but I could record a screencast before
the HF so users can try to get the development setup running even before
they arrive.
If I would attend an onboarding session for me it would be very interesting
to watch how an experienced QGIS developer
Plugin UMEP approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[1364] UMEP 3.11" is now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/UMEP/
___
QGIS-Developer mailing list
QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info:
Plugin Road Inspection Viewer approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[1438] Road Inspection Viewer 1.2.3" is now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/road_inspection_viewer/
___
QGIS-Developer mailing list
QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org
List
Plugin ZoomToBelgium approval by pcav.
The plugin version "[1356] ZoomToBelgium 2.0.1" is now approved
Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/ZoomToBelgium/
___
QGIS-Developer mailing list
QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org
List info:
Hi Nyall
Il 09/12/19 10:09, Nyall Dawson ha scritto:
> Nope: https://www.geopackage.org/guidance/modeling.html
>
> "Allowing multiple geometries per feature table would compromise
> GeoPackage's position in the GIS application ecosystem"
>
> (FWIW, that page is ridiculous, arrogant, and
On 12/9/19 12:00 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 20:10, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
Thanks for the clarification Andreas, indeed there was a misunderstanding on my
end.
That's admittedly a pain point with GPKG, I hope this can be resolved in future
versions of the spec.
But let's be
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 20:10, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>
> Thanks for the clarification Andreas, indeed there was a misunderstanding on
> my end.
>
> That's admittedly a pain point with GPKG, I hope this can be resolved in
> future versions of the spec.
>
> But let's be honest, in QGIS we are not
Thanks for the clarification Andreas, indeed there was a
misunderstanding on my end.
That's admittedly a pain point with GPKG, I hope this can be resolved in
future versions of the spec.
But let's be honest, in QGIS we are not much better yet, integration of
additional geometry columns is
If I may chime in: I think Matthias and Nyall are talking about two
different things:
Matthias: Multigeometry data types, like MultiPolygon, MultiLinestring,
etc. - that is well supported by Geopackage
Nyall: mulitple geometry columns - that works in Postgis, Interlis and
some other
On 12/9/19 10:09 AM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 18:07, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
On 12/8/19 11:35 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 23:19, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
Other proposals are very welcome as well. I don't insist on GeoPackage.
All I do is being a bit skeptic that
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 18:07, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>
> On 12/8/19 11:35 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 23:19, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
> >> Other proposals are very welcome as well. I don't insist on GeoPackage.
> >> All I do is being a bit skeptic that rolling our own format will
On 12/8/19 11:35 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 23:19, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
Other proposals are very welcome as well. I don't insist on GeoPackage.
All I do is being a bit skeptic that rolling our own format will
magically solve problems that one hundred other formats did not
16 matches
Mail list logo
