Hi Even,
Are you sure that the driver uses a default fill value if the attribute is not
present? because bGotNoData seems set to false in this case and so
SetNoDataValue() never called and GetNoDataValue() should return
pbSuccess=false but maybe I'm wrong.
I already falled several years ago on
> I tried gdalinfo (GDAL 2.4.2 + PROJ 6.2.1) on a raster with a CRS that does
> not contain an authority code, and it failed to find any CRS. Recompiling
> with configure --with-proj5-api=no solved the problem for me. That makes
> sense to me because the new PROJ API produces quite different result
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:42 PM Even Rouault
wrote:
>
> On dimanche 3 novembre 2019 21:20:56 CET Markus Metz wrote:
> > Hopefully some package maintainers are listening.
> >
> > A CRS constructed from a proj string (deprecated in GDAL 3 + PROJ 6, I
> > know), works either in PROJ 6 or in GDAL 2, b
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 16:04, Even Rouault wrote:
> > What about integrating the notes within the documentation?
> >
> > 1. Add doc/source/release_notes.rst
> >
> > --
> > Release Notes
> > --
> >
> > .. include:: ../../NEWS.rst
> >
> > 2. Convert top-level NEWS into
Hi,
It has been raised to my attention that the netCDF driver systematically
reports a nodata value when opening a dataset, even if no explicit _FillValue
metadata item is set in the product. This seems to be a behaviour that has
existed forever, but I'm not clear why. For byte/ubyte data types
> What about integrating the notes within the documentation?
>
> 1. Add doc/source/release_notes.rst
>
> --
> Release Notes
> --
>
> .. include:: ../../NEWS.rst
>
> 2. Convert top-level NEWS into NEWS.rst
>
>
> I'm investigating similar approach for another pro
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 15:17, Even Rouault wrote:
> On lundi 4 novembre 2019 14:56:04 CET Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 13:33, jratike80
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Release notes are in trac and therefore the ticket numbers are now
> > > pointing
> > > to the old trac issues as well and
On lundi 4 novembre 2019 14:56:04 CET Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 13:33, jratike80
>
> wrote:
> > Release notes are in trac and therefore the ticket numbers are now
> > pointing
> > to the old trac issues as well and not to GitHub. Example:
> > https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 14:55, Even Rouault wrote:
> On lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:33:21 CET jratike80 wrote:
> >
> > Release notes are in trac and therefore the ticket numbers are now pointing
> > to the old trac issues as well and not to GitHub. Example:
> > https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/1710
>
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 13:33, jratike80
wrote:
>
> Release notes are in trac and therefore the ticket numbers are now pointing
> to the old trac issues as well and not to GitHub. Example:
> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/1710
I'm also wondering Trac is still being used.
Aren't the in-repo note
On lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:33:21 CET jratike80 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Release notes are in trac and therefore the ticket numbers are now pointing
> to the old trac issues as well and not to GitHub. Example:
> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/1710
>
I've fixed the links of the Trac News pages. Ultim
Hi,
Release notes are in trac and therefore the ticket numbers are now pointing
to the old trac issues as well and not to GitHub. Example:
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/1710
-Jukka Rahkonen-
Even Rouault-2 wrote
> Hi,
>
> On behalf of the GDAL/OGR development team, I am pleased to announc
Hi,
On behalf of the GDAL/OGR development team, I am pleased to announce the
release of the GDAL/OGR 3.0.2 bug fix version. This adds 63 bug fixes on top
of 3.0.1
Consult the release notes for the list of issues addressed :
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/Release/3.0.2-News
The sources are
Hi,
On behalf of the GDAL/OGR development team, I am pleased to announce the
release of the GDAL/OGR 2.4.3 bug fix version. This adds 45 bug fixes on top
of 2.4.2.
Consult the release notes for the list of issues addressed :
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/Release/2.4.3-News
The sources are
> Even Rouault-2 wrote
>
> > Motion: approve GDAL 2.4.3RC1 and 3.0.2RC1 as final
>
I declare this motion passed with +1 from PSC members JukkaR, SeanG, DanielM,
HowardB, MateuszL and myself
Even
--
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com
Dear GDAL experts,
Working for the provider of the PROBA-V data, I can confirm that
the intention is to have a grid with integer degrees at pixel centre.
So the -180.00xxx (half pixel west of -180) reported by gdalinfo for upperleft
corner of upperleft pixel is fine,
though we realize that this g
16 matches
Mail list logo
