On 08.10.2015 16:19, Giovanni Manghi wrote:
We also should move the first one to the analysis library, so that the
routines are accessible by plugins and processing framework.... Just
another item on the TODO list!
sure, big improvement. better opening a ticket?
Giovanni, could you please add tickets for the missing features of the
new plugin, and one for the removal of previous plugins?
all the best, and thanks.
I must say that I like more the concept of rules in Topology Checker
instead of one big dialog used in Geometry Checker. Both from UI and
programming point of view. It is more flexible and extensible. I am
curious why a new plugin was started instead of improvement of the old
one. I don't think that the Topology Checker should be simply removed
until we have something similar in terms of definition and
implementation of rules.
Hi, I haven't suggested to remove immediately the topology checker,
but just said that the redundancy with the python geometry checker and
now with the new geometry checker is very puzzling for final users, so
one way or another we should get rid of it (the redundancy).
Moreover the new tool can fix geometries, and this is of course a
must. All the mentioned tools have issues: the topology checker with
reprojected layers and false positives in particular but also the new
geometry checker has a few ones, see for example
http://hub.qgis.org/issues/13535
Yep - as mentioned in the original PR, the port to the new geometry core
is pretty fresh and it didn't get as much testing as our previous
version based on the old geometry core. So any error reports are
welcome, I'll look at fixing any outstanding issues.
Thanks
Sandro
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
