Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
[x] Make sure you are requesting to pull a topic/feature/bugfix branch (right side). Don't request your master!
[x] Make sure you are making a pull request against the develop branch (left side). Also you should start your branch off our develop.
[x] Check the commit's or even all commits' message styles matches our requested structure.
[ ] Check your code additions will fail neither code linting checks nor unit test.
Pull request type
Please check the type of change your PR introduces:
- [ ] Bugfix
- [x] Feature
- [ ] Code style update (formatting, renaming)
- [ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
- [ ] Build related changes
- [ ] Documentation content changes
- [ ] Other (please describe):
## What is the current behavior?
If inputs contain geometries that do not intersect the tree cover loss raster extent, those geometries will be lost. If the input contains only non-intersecting geometries, ForestChangeDiagnoticCommand will fail outright.
Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
I introduce a complementary join to ValidatedFeatureRDD that will identify geometries that have no intersection with the tree cover loss extent, and will track their feature IDs as NoIntersectionErrors. These will be propagated into the output.
Does this introduce a breaking change?
[ ] Yes
[x] No
Other information
A test input containing only two out-of-bounds geometries yields the following final output:
Pull request checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
Pull request type
Please check the type of change your PR introduces: - [ ] Bugfix - [x] Feature - [ ] Code style update (formatting, renaming) - [ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes) - [ ] Build related changes - [ ] Documentation content changes - [ ] Other (please describe): ## What is the current behavior?If inputs contain geometries that do not intersect the tree cover loss raster extent, those geometries will be lost. If the input contains only non-intersecting geometries,
ForestChangeDiagnoticCommand
will fail outright.Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
I introduce a complementary join to
ValidatedFeatureRDD
that will identify geometries that have no intersection with the tree cover loss extent, and will track their feature IDs asNoIntersectionError
s. These will be propagated into the output.Does this introduce a breaking change?
Other information
A test input containing only two out-of-bounds geometries yields the following final output: