Re: [Insight-users] ITK 3.16 Packages for Ubuntu Karmic Koala (9.10)

[Mathieu Malaterre <mathieu.malaterre@gmail.com>]

Steve,

  If you have been reading this thread, what is your point of view ?
Do you think you can move to ITK/WrapITK (this would solve the numpy
vs numarray issue as a side effect) ?

thanks,

2009/11/2 Gaëtan Lehmann <gaetan.lehmann@jouy.inra.fr>:
>
> Le 2 nov. 09 à 09:16, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
>
>> Luis,
>>
>>  That is terrific ! At least Kitware's roadmap is clear ! Thanks so
>> much. Gaetan, could you remind me (us?) why you choose to developg
>> google/WrapITK instead of directly working on ITK/WrapITK ?
>
> Sure: I made drastic changes in the wrapping process, and it was absolutely
> impossible to make it without breaking things.
> Also, I made most of the work on my spare time, and so I had no idea about
> when things may be usable again (if usable at all).
> Last point: cableswig has been replaced by swig (the unmodified one) and a
> custom program - igenerator.py - to parse the output of gccxml and produce a
> swig interface. Unfortunately, igenerator.py is written in python, so it
> adds a dependency on python to build java or tcl wrappers.
>
>> Is it
>> possible to backport google/WrapITK into ITK ?
>
> There are still a few problems:
> * dependency on python due to igenerator.py. It should be possible to recode
> it in C++, but it's a work with a very low priority on my todo list, so it's
> very unlikely to be done soon. But is it really a problem?
> * there is a bug - I think in swig - which makes some methods not be wrapped
> in tcl. See this test failure for example:
> http://www.cdash.org/CDash/viewTest.php?onlyfailed&buildid=461742
>
>>
>>  Thanks again !
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez@kitware.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Mathieu,
>>>
>>> As we move forward to ITK 4.0, it is likely that WrapITK will
>>> become the official way of wrapping ITK, and at that point
>>> Paul's way of of packaging should probably become the
>>> standard.
>>>
>>> At this point, however, the fault is really on us, as developers of
>>> the toolkit, for not having made our minds about fully supporting
>>> one wrapping system or the other.
>>>
>>> Hopefully, ITK 4.0 will give us the opportunity to clean up
>>> many corners of the toolkit.
>>>
>>>    Luis
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Paul Novotny <paul.novotny@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>>  I still do not understand why you insist on building an outside
>>>>> ubuntu package.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I build them for my own internal use, and just decided to release
>>>> them to the public. Since there are people who use and appreciate it, I
>>>> continue to do it.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ref:
>>>>> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/insighttoolkit
>>>>>
>>>>>  What is wrong with the one in ubuntu ? Why not work with the
>>>>> ubuntu-team to get issues fixed ? Why not work with the debian-med
>>>>> team to get it fixed (earlier in the pipeline) ?
>>>>
>>>> There is nothing wrong with the ubuntu/debian version. They appear to be
>>>> using the CSWIG wrapping version. I have used and continue to use
>>>> WrapITK in my own work, and therefor create the packages. So there is
>>>> nothing to 'fix'.
>>>>
>>>>>  BTW, I did post a couple of days ago about usage of CSWIG vs WrapITK
>>>>> vs WrapITK. It seems you have chosen the solution #2 (the unmaintained
>>>>> WrapITK shipped with ITK). Could you comment on your choice please ?
>>>>
>>>> As far as why I chose #2, well, I think the post from Gaëtan Lehmann you
>>>> referenced perfectly sums up why (if you don't mind me paraphrasing).
>>>> CSWIG is older and doesn't have as much itk coverage. Wrapitk, great
>>>> python integration, better itk coverage, and is tested and stable. The
>>>> new WrapITK, while faster, cleaner, and with better code coverage is
>>>> unstable, and isn't as well tested.
>>>>
>>>> So, in the end, I don't understand why you don't like it that I release
>>>> these packages?
>>>>
>>>> -Paul
>>>>
>>>> _____________________________________
>>>> Powered by www.kitware.com
>>>>
>>>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>>>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>>>>
>>>> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
>>>> http://www.kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>>>>
>>>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
>>>> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>>>>
>>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>>> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mathieu
>
> --
> Gaëtan Lehmann
> Biologie du Développement et de la Reproduction
> INRA de Jouy-en-Josas (France)
> tel: +33 1 34 65 29 66    fax: 01 34 65 29 09
> http://voxel.jouy.inra.fr  http://www.itk.org
> http://www.mandriva.org  http://www.bepo.fr
>
>



-- 
Mathieu