Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Fix for #609 - 3.3: Tile raster layers are not rendered in a good way #215

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Fix for #609 - 3.3: Tile raster layers are not rendered in a good way #215

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

diegomigliavacca
Copy link
Contributor

@tfr42
Copy link
Member

tfr42 commented Feb 21, 2014

Dear Diego,

again, thanks a lot for that patch. Could you please provide also a pull request for 3.4?
In case of questions or you need support ... you know it! ... contact the TMC

Cheers
Torsten

@diegomigliavacca
Copy link
Contributor Author

This pull request is just for the 3.3 version. The bug that this patch fixes is not seen on the 3.4 version, so a pull request for the 3.4 version will not to be available.

@MrSnyder
Copy link
Contributor

Can you please line out how to reproduce the problem? The Utah demo contains an (mostly unnoticed) WMTS config, can it be used for that?

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 24, 2014

The problem occurs with WMS based on GeoTiffTileStores. It does not occur with every GeoTiffTileStore, but definitely if you have a WMS layer based on several TileStores.

@MrSnyder MrSnyder closed this Apr 29, 2014
@MrSnyder MrSnyder reopened this Apr 29, 2014
@MrSnyder
Copy link
Contributor

I am sorry, but I still do not get what "not rendered in a good way" refers to exactly. In order to evaluate the contribution, would it be possible to provide one of the following (in order of preference):

  • A test case that encodes assertions on the changed behavior
  • A self-contained test workspace and example requests so one can compare the behavior with and without patch
  • Screenshots that demonstrate the behavior with and without patch

@diegomigliavacca
Copy link
Contributor Author

When you use a WMS based on a GeoTiffTileStore, tiles are only partially rendered. So, some parts of the full image are missing.

@tfr42 tfr42 added this to the 3.3.10 milestone Jun 26, 2014
@tfr42
Copy link
Member

tfr42 commented Jun 26, 2014

Thank you for your contribution. Unfortunately, it does not compile / has test errors. It cannot be considered for inclusion, before this has been fixed. Sorry.
Additional information:

@tfr42 tfr42 modified the milestones: 3.3.11, 3.3.10 Jun 26, 2014
@tfr42 tfr42 added the bug label Jul 10, 2014
@tfr42 tfr42 modified the milestones: 3.3.12, 3.3.11 Jul 10, 2014
@tfr42 tfr42 modified the milestone: 3.3.12 Jul 24, 2014
@tfr42
Copy link
Member

tfr42 commented Jul 30, 2014

Bug fix for 3.3. Same fix as for 3.4 in #149.

@diegomigliavacca
Copy link
Contributor Author

It breaks the deegree-compliance-tests.

Tests in error:
singleTest0: Test 'wms:wms_main' failed.
singleTest1: Test 'wms:basic_elements-param_rules-order_and_case-3' failed.
singleTest2: Test 'wms:basic_elements-version-negotiation-2' failed.
singleTest3: Test 'wms:basic_elements-version-negotiation-4' failed.
singleTest4: Test 'wms:dims-declaring-1' failed.
singleTest5: Test 'wms:dims-declaring-3' failed.
singleTest6: Test 'wms:dims-declaring-4' failed.
singleTest7: Test 'wms:profiles-queryable-1' failed.
singleTest8: Test 'wms:profiles-queryable-2' failed.
singleTest9: Test 'wms:profiles-queryable-3' failed.
singleTest10: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-output_formats-1' failed.
singleTest11: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-request-1' failed.
singleTest12: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-updatesequence-1' failed.
singleTest13: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-version-1' failed.
singleTest14: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-version-2' failed.
singleTest15: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-version-3' failed.
singleTest16: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-version-4' failed.
singleTest17: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-version-5' failed.
singleTest18: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-params-version-6' failed.
singleTest19: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-1' failed.
singleTest20: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-2' failed.
singleTest21: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-capability_metadata-1' failed.
singleTest22: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-capability_metadata-2' failed.
singleTest23: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-general_metadata-1' failed.
singleTest24: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-general_metadata-2' failed.
singleTest25: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-bbox-1' failed.
singleTest26: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-dim_and_extent-1' failed.
singleTest27: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-dim_and_extent-2' failed.
singleTest28: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-identifier_and_authorityurl-1' failed.
singleTest29: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-identifier_and_authorityurl-2' failed.
singleTest30: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-latlonbbox-1' failed.
singleTest31: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-latlonbbox-2' failed.
singleTest32: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-srs-1' failed.
singleTest33: Test 'wms:wmsops-getcapabilities-response-layer_properties-style-1' failed.
singleTest34: Test 'wms:wmsops-getmap-params-exceptions-1' failed.
singleTest35: Test 'wms:wmsops-getmap-params-exceptions-2' failed.
singleTest36: Test 'wms:wmsops-getmap-params-layers-5' failed.
singleTest37: Test 'wms:wmsops-getmap-layer-encoded-name' failed.
singleTest38: Test 'wms:basic_elements-validate-exception' failed.
singleTest0: Test 'main:main' failed.
singleTest0: Test 'main:main' failed.
singleTest0: Test 'wcs1-0-0:main' failed.
singleTest0: Test 'wfs:wfs-main' failed.
singleTest0: Test 'wfs:main' failed.
singleTest1: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-1' failed.
singleTest2: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-2' failed.
singleTest3: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-3' failed.
singleTest4: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-4' failed.
singleTest5: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-5' failed.
singleTest6: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-6' failed.
singleTest7: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-7' failed.
singleTest8: Test 'wfs:test1.0.0-basic-getcapabilities-get-8' failed.

@MrSnyder MrSnyder added this to the 3.3.13 milestone Nov 11, 2014
@tfr42 tfr42 added the needs discussion requires discussion with contributor label Nov 11, 2014
@tfr42 tfr42 modified the milestones: 3.3.14, 3.3.13 Nov 13, 2014
@tfr42
Copy link
Member

tfr42 commented Feb 6, 2015

Thank you for your contribution. Your pull request has been discussed by the TMC. Please see the following remarks from the TMC members:

However, we found that it is not ready yet for inclusion:
The TMC would be happy if can find the time to address these shortcomings as described above.

@tfr42 tfr42 added this to the 3.3.15 milestone Feb 6, 2015
@tfr42 tfr42 removed this from the 3.3.14 milestone Feb 6, 2015
@tfr42 tfr42 added the contributions welcome asking for contribution (time and money sponsor) label Mar 4, 2015
@tfr42
Copy link
Member

tfr42 commented Apr 24, 2015

Is anyone needing this bug fix? Can someone post the issue which this PR is trying to fix? We need input from the author.

@tfr42 tfr42 added the stuck stuck PR label Apr 24, 2015
@tfr42 tfr42 modified the milestones: 3.3.16, 3.3.15 Apr 24, 2015
@tfr42 tfr42 self-assigned this Apr 24, 2015
@diegomigliavacca
Copy link
Contributor Author

This pull request has been around for long time. I close it and I will possibly submit it again later, whenever I will find a fix which doesn't break the integration tests.

@diegomigliavacca diegomigliavacca deleted the tk#609 branch July 1, 2015 13:00
@tfr42 tfr42 removed this from the 3.3.16 milestone Oct 1, 2015
@tfr42 tfr42 added invalid invalid and removed bug error issue and bug (fix) contributions welcome asking for contribution (time and money sponsor) needs discussion requires discussion with contributor stuck stuck PR tests failing unit or Integration tests fail labels Oct 1, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@tfr42 tfr42

Labels
invalid invalid
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@diegomigliavacca @tfr42 @MrSnyder