[mapserver-dev] The legendary story of mapObj.zoomRectangle (a cabaret show)

[Lime, Steve D (DNR)]

I'd like to take a peek at the isValidItem() issue before doing a 5.6.2...

-----Original Message-----
From: mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Alan Boudreault
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 3:47 PM
To: mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [mapserver-dev] The legendary story of mapObj.zoomRectangle (a cabaret show)

Tamas,

Someone also reported on IRC that problem (IIRC, 2-3 weeks ago). My change was 
a misinterpretation and shouldn't have been done. I had not understood why 
this part of the code was different of the php similar function. As you said 
on IRC "treating maxy >= miny as a failure is semantically irregular", but 
this commit changed the behavior of the function that exists for a long time. 
I would suggest to revert it and backport it in branch 5.6.             

Perhaps it would be a good opportunity to release 5.6.2 ? Are there enough 
important fixes in the branch?
  
regards,
Alan

On March 3, 2010 03:49:54 pm Tamas Szekeres wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Upon upgrading my existing application to 5.6.1 I'm getting frustrated
>  about the changes of the rectangle check in mapObj.zoomRectangle. So let
>  me summarize how the related code have changed within the past 5 years.
> 
> - 2004-06-26 The stuff has been committed by sean in r3294 mapzoom.i Ln 280
> if (poPixRect->maxy >= poPixRect->miny)
>         {
>             msSetError(MS_MISCERR, "Georeferenced coordinates miny <=
>  maxy", "mapscript::mapObj::zoomRectangle()");
>             return MS_FAILURE;
>         }
> 
> - 2006-05-30  First attempt to swap miny and maxy by umberto in r5472
> 
> - 2006-07-24  The change have been reverted by hobu in r5542
> 
> - 2006-12-13 Second attempt to swap miny and maxy by sdlime in r5859
> 
> - 2006-12-13 Reverted the change by sdlime in r5864
> 
> - 2009-10-12 Third attempt to swap miny and maxy by aboudreault in r9444
> 
> There have been a couple of tickets related to this issue like:
> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/1817
> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/1982
> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/1988
> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/3286
> 
> 
> While I'm a bit lost with the reason of these reverts it seems we don't
>  have solid standpoint on how this consistency check should be done. I
>  would anticipate I'm not against this change, however I would not want to
>  alter my existing scipts (like now) in every release in order to have my
>  code working.
> 
> Could someone confirm this change won't be reverted in the future releases?
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Tamas
> 

-- 
Alan Boudreault
Mapgears
http://www.mapgears.com
_______________________________________________
mapserver-dev mailing list
mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev