🪟 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)

@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?

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.

@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?

@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.

@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?

@JanCaha, sorry for the late reply. Considering that it seems to me the minimum required PDAL version currently is 2.5 as defined in CMakeLists.txt, if the issue is actually due to the fact that PDAL Wrench 1.3.0 doesn't support PDAL 2.5.6 used by Fedora 39, then I think either the vendored PDAL Wrench in QGIS should be fixed to support PDAL 2.5 or the minimum PDAL version should be increased to the actual minimum supported version.

Let's dissociate the PDAL 2.5.6 compatibility and the backporting of wrench 1.3.0
I'd suggest we skip the backporting, as it's a new features version, and verify the wrench 1.4.0 compatibility with older PDAL versions and adjust accordingly.

+1 to skip backporting pdal wrench 1.3.0 to LTR - it is mostly just new algorithms...

Actually the PDAL Wrench version 1.3.0 also fixes various bugs which could lead to exceptions and crashes, notably PDAL/wrench#78 "pdal_wrench crashes when the --filter expression is incorrect".
I would propose to backport at least the fix for such issue.