Skip to content

Conversation

@qgis-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Backport #64303
Authored by: @JanCaha

@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 3.44.6 milestone Dec 18, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 18, 2025

🪟 Windows builds

Download Windows builds of this PR for testing.
Debug symbols for this build are available here.
(Built from commit e69f0f5)

🪟 Windows Qt6 builds

Download Windows Qt6 builds of this PR for testing.
(Built from commit e69f0f5)

@agiudiceandrea
Copy link
Member

agiudiceandrea commented Dec 18, 2025

@alexbruy @JanCaha, unfortunately, some tests in test_analysis_processingpdalalgs fail for "Run tests (6, ALL_BUT_PROVIDERS)", while they don't fail for "Run tests (5, ALL_BUT_PROVIDERS)". Not sure why. Shouldn't it be OK since QGIS 3.44 will only be available for Qt5?

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 2, 2026

The QGIS project highly values your contribution and would love to see this work merged! Unfortunately this PR has not had any activity in the last 14 days and is being automatically marked as "stale". If you think this pull request should be merged, please check

  • that all unit tests are passing

  • that all comments by reviewers have been addressed

  • that there is enough information for reviewers, in particular

    • link to any issues which this pull request fixes

    • add a description of workflows which this pull request fixes

    • add screenshots if applicable

  • that you have written unit tests where possible
    In case you should have any uncertainty, please leave a comment and we will be happy to help you proceed with this pull request.
    If there is no further activity on this pull request, it will be closed in a week.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale Uh oh! Seems this work is abandoned, and the PR is about to close. label Jan 2, 2026
@JanCaha
Copy link
Contributor

JanCaha commented Jan 4, 2026

@agiudiceandrea It is also strange because those tests passed for original PR (here. I dont see a way why those should fail here, also there is no reason for those test to behave differently in 5 and 6. Would you mind reruning those tests?

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale Uh oh! Seems this work is abandoned, and the PR is about to close. label Jan 4, 2026
@agiudiceandrea agiudiceandrea reopened this Jan 4, 2026
@agiudiceandrea
Copy link
Member

agiudiceandrea commented Jan 4, 2026

@JanCaha, thanks for looking at this. Anyway the tests TestQgsProcessingPdalAlgs::clip(), TestQgsProcessingPdalAlgs::merge(), TestQgsProcessingPdalAlgs::reproject(), in "Run tests (6, ALL_BUT_PROVIDERS)", still fail: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/actions/runs/20693664537/job/59408847511?pr=64345#step:13:1063.

It is also strange because those tests passed for original PR (here. I dont see a way why those should fail here

It may be due to the fact that the tests for release-3_44 branch are run on Fedora 39 with PDAL 2.5.6, while for master branch the tests are run on Fedora 42 with PDAL 2.8.4.

@JanCaha
Copy link
Contributor

JanCaha commented Jan 5, 2026

@agiudiceandrea Ah, I did not realize that, I have been working with latest PDAL. That could be a reason.

I kind of was not happy with this being backported, as this is a new version of WRENCH not just fixes. A lot of things changed and were updated from previous version. So I was worried that something like this might happen.

I know that there was specific problem that you wanted to address with that, but maybe only that fix could be backported?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants