Make aggregate_polygon and filter_polygon more general #131
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was referenced Jan 20, 2020
Closed
Closed
soxofaan
reviewed
Jan 21, 2020
mkadunc
reviewed
Jan 21, 2020
mkadunc
approved these changes
Jan 21, 2020
…sulting data cube.
aljacob
approved these changes
Jan 27, 2020
lforesta
approved these changes
Jan 27, 2020
soxofaan
approved these changes
Jan 27, 2020
|
Hey @GreatEmerald! Could you please check this PR asap so that it is sure it suits your use-case? I'll need a response this week, I'll release on Friday at latest. |
|
OK, I'll try to look into this tomorrow. |
GreatEmerald
suggested changes
Jan 28, 2020
…rocesses with binary reduction.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Make aggregate_polygon and filter_polygon more general (broaden it for points and line strings). (Is there a use case for mask_polygon, too?)
Tackles issues #62 and #37. Based on PR #107 from @kempenep.