Fix #10734 Fix print tms layers with 4326#10738
Fix #10734 Fix print tms layers with 4326#10738MV88 wants to merge 6 commits intogeosolutions-it:masterfrom
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@MV88 as discussed earlier, I'm highlighting the issues that I observed with TMS & print tool
- With the TMS layer, the layers are not always included in the output. While the spec appears fine, the resulting output sometimes misses the layer. This issue occurs with both 3857 and 4326 projections. Perhaps it would provide some insight into why TMS layers were skipped when the projection was set to something other than the default 3857
- In certain cases, the layer is not previewed or displayed correctly in the print tool. This issue occurs when changing the CRS or opening the print tool with EPSG:4326, among other scenarios
- Using the OSM provider for TMS, the layer prints correctly when the CRS is 3857 but fails to print when it is set to 4326
Testing
I have used this map to test
Catalog services used
https://gs-stable.geo-solutions.it/geoserver/gwc/service/tms/1.0.0 (Layer: States of US)
https://public.sig.rennesmetropole.fr/geowebcache/service/tms/1.0.0 (Layer: Cadastre Rennes Métropole)
I imagined that one issue was related to the fact that resolutions and mapextent are not aligned to 4326, but changing them did not make any difference. So the issue of printing tms is not resolvable FE side only. We need to investigate deeply on mapfish side if this is possible also considering what reported here #5292 I also did another test and it turns out that maps in 4326 does not render tms layers this may be indicative of the issue that happens in mapfish, a debug session on the backend is needed imho |
|
Doing some tests with TMS i noticed the following issues:
Video.del.2025-04-08.14-30-25.mp4
Video.del.2025-04-08.14-37-45.mp4So some bugs for sure are present in MapStore. I didn't tested printing in 4326, but I'm assuming it works (as other layers work). Do you have a different experience from me. By the way, this fix is applied on the old UI. Does it makes sense? Maybe is better to merge with master. |
I will include this in current PR
i've opened this for it #11012 |
|
@tdipisa @offtherailz pr updated Review again please |
|
@tdipisa JFI this PR is still failing, so for my point of view, still need to wait for the review |
|
The unit test fails @MV88 |
@MV88 please while doing the fix for the test failure, also retest on the light of https://github.com/geosolutions-it/support/issues/3908#issuecomment-3306335329 |
Description
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (check one with "x", remove the others)
Issue
What is the current behavior?
Fix #10734
What is the new behavior?
it prints also tms layers in 4326
Breaking change
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (check one with "x", remove the other)
Other useful information