Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Do not copy 'visible' property for WMTS layers #5404

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 7, 2020

Conversation

adube
Copy link
Contributor

@adube adube commented Jan 6, 2020

The WMTS layers are created in a way that their properties get asynchronously set, i.e. after WMTS capabilities are obtained.

The setting of the layer's initial visibility can be done before that, which can result in an issue of overriding the visibility after the capabilities are read, i.e. the created layer while reading the capabilities has its visible property set to true, but the original one may have its visible property to false.

To fix this issue, an utility method was added in the LayerHelper of ngeo to be able to exclude the keys we know we don't want to copy.

@adube adube requested a review from fredj January 6, 2020 20:37
@adube adube changed the title Do not copy visible property for WMTS layers Do not copy 'visible' property for WMTS layers Jan 6, 2020
Copy link
Member

@sbrunner sbrunner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice thanks, I let @fredj to review the code :-)

Copy link
Member

@fredj fredj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good thanks. Same remark as @sbrunner about the changes in Permalink

@adube adube merged commit ed1ff8f into master Jan 7, 2020
@adube adube deleted the gsgmf-1153-fix-alpenkovention branch January 7, 2020 15:11
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.

3 participants