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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Don't break on missing attributes with isochrone intersections #876

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 25, 2021
Merged

Don't break on missing attributes with isochrone intersections #876

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 25, 2021

Conversation

koebi
Copy link
Collaborator

@koebi koebi commented Mar 18, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Pull Request Checklist

  • 1. I have rebased the latest version of the master branch into my feature branch and all conflicts have been resolved.
  • 2. I have added information about the change/addition to functionality to the CHANGELOG.md file under the [Unreleased] heading.
  • 3. I have documented my code using JDocs tags.
  • 4. I have removed unnecessary commented out code, imports and System.out.println statements.
  • 5. I have written JUnit tests for any new methods/classes and ensured that they pass.
  • 6. I have created API tests for any new functionality exposed to the API.
  • 7. If changes/additions are made to the app.config file, I have added these to the app.config wiki page on github along with a short description of what it is for, and documented this in the Pull Request (below).
  • 8. I have built graphs with my code of the Heidelberg.osm.gz file and run the api-tests with all test passing
  • 9. I have referenced the Issue Number in the Pull Request (if the changes were from an issue).
  • 10. For new features or changes involving building of graphs, I have tested on a larger dataset (at least Germany) and the graphs build without problems (i.e. no out-of-memory errors).
  • 11. For new features or changes involving the graphbuilding process (i.e. changing encoders, updating the importer etc.), I have generated longer distance routes for the affected profiles with different options (avoid features, max weight etc.) and compared these with the routes of the same parameters and start/end points generated from the current live ORS. If there are differences then the reasoning for these MUST be documented in the pull request.
  • 12. I have written in the Pull Request information about the changes made including their intended usage and why the change was needed.

Fixes #675
In addition, some types were changed from raw to parameterized for clearer code and more type safety.

takb
takb requested changes Mar 19, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@takb takb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok, but please drop a line in the change log, and also mention the issue in the PR comment.

@koebi koebi changed the title Fix 675 Don't break on missing attributes with isochrone intersections Mar 24, 2021
takb
takb approved these changes Mar 25, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@takb takb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

0.0% 0.0% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

@takb takb merged commit 3e68ae9 into master Mar 25, 2021
@koebi koebi deleted the fix-675 branch March 25, 2021 18:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@takb takb takb approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

no response for intersections=true
2 participants
@koebi @takb