[Qgis-developer] Remaining work to get rid of old labeling?

Larry Shaffer larrys at dakotacarto.com
Fri Nov 16 14:19:09 PST 2012

Hi Régis,

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:27 PM, haubourg
<regis.haubourg at eau-adour-garonne.fr> wrote:
> Hi Larry,
> I share Andreas concerns, and am wondering how I can help funding some work
> to help you.
> I really think speed improvement should be explored in depth.

Agreed. PAL is kinda complicated in some regards, but it would really
be worth it. I'm a bit curious about an apples vs. apples comparison
between old/new engines, where the new engine is set up, as much as
possible, to simulate the old engine. Then, do some benchmarking to
see the difference.

If that baseline benchmark is quite similar, I would suggest similar
settings be the new defaults (excepting collision avoidance, which
should be on by default), and recommend that current new engine
performance not be considered a blocking issue for removing the old
one. Though, maybe making it better/faster should be considered a
blocking issue for 2.0 release?

> I'm also concerned in having curved label consolidated . Seeing actual
> roadmap, I guess it now is a feature request for 2.1. or do we still have
> some time to have somebody work on it?

Not sure what you mean by 'consolidated.' ?? There is certainly a lack
of feature parity between curved and other line placements, as well as
several noticeable limitations, resulting in too few labels rendered.

However, since curved labels were not in the old engine, or have any
bearing on whether the old engine is removed or not, I think a
different discussion thread should be started about what people want
to specifically see in the 2.0 release, regarding labeling.

There are definitely other items (fixes and features) I would like to
see in the 2.0 release that are listed on that page, but focusing on
removing the old engine is a good user-centric initial goal. Beyond
that, a feature freeze at the end of January would provide much
appreciated 'breathing room' to accomplish more of the list, and to
achieve a better 'punctuated equilibrium' point for a release.

Example (of something that should be in a different discussion thread
;^) : I'd love to see an adaptation of your Easy Custom Labeling
plugin for auto-generating the appropriate data defined columns in the
current data provider for a layer, or in a new one. There's really no
reason for that functionality (even if initially in Python) not to be
part of the core labeling dialog. A separate class for that function
could be written/worked on at the same time as other labeling items,
without much interference between the two efforts (i.e. room for
several devs to work at once).

Thank you for your efforts to help out!



> Please tell me
> Régis
> --
> View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.n6.nabble.com/Remaining-work-to-get-rid-of-old-labeling-tp5016190p5017007.html
> Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

More information about the Qgis-developer mailing list