[QGIS-Developer] What to do about WFS test failures?

[Jeremy Palmer]

Can I also add that the refactoring that was funded in 2.16 added tests,
paging support, filter query builder and dynamic caching. There is now a
lot of complexity in the driver due to the complexity of WFS server
implementations and the standard, plus the multi-threading code. If a
refactor is proposed I would be against anything that doesn't deal current
use cases and edge cases which have already been implemented. Maybe some
analysis of the failed tests is the first place to start. WFS-T is a side
issue to that.

Cheers,
Jeremy

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:51 AM Régis Haubourg <regis.haubourg at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Even, thanks for pointing that, I missed that history.
> I'll ask the dev's for the detailed improvements planned, I dont' have any
> detail currently (sorry for that)
> Régis
>
> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 21:29, Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Régis,
>>
>> Not that I'm against improvements, all the contrary, but just wanted to
>> underline that the provider was seriously refactored already in 2.16.
>> Clearly
>> the lack of WFS-T support for 1.1 and 2.0 in the scope of those
>> enhancements
>> can be a source of confusion currently for users. What do you have in
>> mind as
>> refactoring exactly ?
>>
>> Even
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> > I very much think that the WFS client is an really bad state, and is not
>> > really reliable, especially in WFS-T context.
>> > The good news is that we just have been funded to refactor it !
>> > The work should start in september and land in 3.6. I will let our dev's
>> > come here with more technical details about the goals. I hope we will
>> also
>> > be able to take benefit of this to this the OGC compliancy of the client
>> > here.
>> > Best regards,
>> > Régis
>> >
>> > Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 11:36, Tom Chadwin <tom.chadwin at nnpa.org.uk> a
>> >
>> > écrit :
>> > > I can't offer any helpful suggestions, but just to let you know I
>> finally
>> > > had
>> > > to disable all my plugin WFS tests. I used to cope, by rerunning
>> failed
>> > > Travis runs, but by about three months ago, it seemed no longer
>> usable -
>> > > failure after failure.
>> > >
>> > > I was using a third-party WFS, and perhaps I could have got round
>> this by
>> > > adding a WFS provider to the test docker image, but in this plugin's
>> case,
>> > > I
>> > > didn't think it worth the significant effort to do so. The WM(T)S
>> tests
>> > > also
>> > > use third-party sources and seem stable, so perhaps this wasn't the
>> > > underlying issue anyway.
>> > >
>> > > If an improvement or solution could be found, it would be great to
>> > > reinstate
>> > > these tests.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks
>> > >
>> > > Tom
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -----
>> > > Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon
>> > > --
>> > > Sent from:
>> > > http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QGIS-Developer-f4099106.html
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > QGIS-Developer mailing list
>> > > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> > > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>>
>> --
>> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>> http://www.spatialys.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-Developer mailing list
> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20180904/ed255551/attachment.html>