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

[processing] use active layer by default in field calculator algorithm (fix #19686) #8945

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 22, 2019
Merged

[processing] use active layer by default in field calculator algorithm (fix #19686) #8945

merged 1 commit into from Jan 22, 2019

Conversation

alexbruy
Copy link
Contributor

@alexbruy alexbruy commented Jan 22, 2019

Description

In contrast to all other native algorithms Field Calculator does not use active layer as an input by default. This is a bit inconvenient.

Fixes https://issues.qgis.org/issues/19686

Checklist

Reviewing is a process done by project maintainers, mostly on a volunteer basis. We try to keep the overhead as small as possible and appreciate if you help us to do so by completing the following items. Feel free to ask in a comment if you have troubles with any of them.

  • Commit messages are descriptive and explain the rationale for changes
  • Commits which fix bugs include fixes #11111 in the commit message next to the description
  • Commits which add new features are tagged with [FEATURE] in the commit message
  • Commits which change the UI or existing user workflows are tagged with [needs-docs] in the commit message and contain sufficient information in the commit message to be documented
  • I have read the QGIS Coding Standards and this PR complies with them
  • This PR passes all existing unit tests (test results will be reported by travis-ci after opening this PR)
  • New unit tests have been added for core changes
  • I have run the scripts/prepare-commit.sh script before each commit

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.

None yet

2 participants