Attempt to delegate bounding box transformation to proj on >= 8.2

[nyalldawson]

Opening for CI run

[github-actions]

🪟 Windows builds

Download Windows builds of this PR for testing.
Debug symbols for this build are available here.
(Built from commit 8edbe0d)

🪟 Windows Qt6 builds

Download Windows Qt6 builds of this PR for testing.
(Built from commit 8edbe0d)

[github-actions]

Tests failed for Qt 5

One or more tests failed using the build from commit 8edbe0d

4978_2D_line_rendering (epsg4978LineRendering)

4978_2D_line_rendering

Test failed at epsg4978LineRendering at tests/src/core/testqgsclipper.cpp:207

Rendered image did not match tests/testdata/control_images/3d/expected_4978_2D_line_rendering/expected_4978_2D_line_rendering.png (found 63794 pixels different)

The full test report (included comparison of rendered vs expected images) can be found here.

Further documentation on the QGIS test infrastructure can be found in the Developer's Guide.

[github-actions]

Tests failed for Qt 6

One or more tests failed using the build from commit 8edbe0d

4978_2D_line_rendering (epsg4978LineRendering)

4978_2D_line_rendering

Test failed at epsg4978LineRendering at tests/src/core/testqgsclipper.cpp:207

Rendered image did not match tests/testdata/control_images/3d/expected_4978_2D_line_rendering/expected_4978_2D_line_rendering.png (found 63794 pixels different)

The full test report (included comparison of rendered vs expected images) can be found here.

Further documentation on the QGIS test infrastructure can be found in the Developer's Guide.

[nyalldawson]

@rouault is 8edbe0d a known requirement for proj_trans_bounds?

[rouault]

is 8edbe0d a known requirement for proj_trans_bounds?

on released versions of PROJ, yes, since I fixed 3D support only in PROJ master per OSGeo/PROJ#4333 a couple months ago

[nyalldawson]

Thanks @rouault !

I noticed that fix is similar to my workaround in 8edbe0d. Do you think we should:

1. Defer this whole change till newer proj is available.
2. Use the (buggy) old qgis logic when a compound crs is in play
3. Or conditionally apply the same logic as the proj fix?

[rouault]

Do you think we should:

I'd just add a PROJ_VERSION < 9.6 protection around your commit