Re: DICOM viewers (Was: Contributing to DebianMed)
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 11:20:59PM +0200, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
>
> kradview couldn't do what aeskulap was able to do for me last time
> I looked. In fact, kradview isn't even installable anymore in a recent
> Debian AFAICT which simply kills it as far as GNUmed is concerned.
Good point. If the packaging in 2008 would have been simple I would
have finished it. ;-)
> > So perhaps spending some time into comparing these two projects (I
> > personally have no real idea how to compare the features) might make
> > sense. If it turns out that kradview is better than Aeskulap we should
> > perhaps restart the packaging effort of this
>
> Package an already-dead project because it seems better than an
> already-packaged, also-dead project ? Hey, why not :-)
Well, I wrote "If it turns out ..." which does not seem to be the case ...
BTW, this fact lets me think about adding an
DeadUpstream: yes
field for the tasks files. We have some of such packages and it might
be some interesting information which could be rendered on the web
sentinel. What do you think?
> There is none that I am aware of that are of interest to GNUmed
> (clinical diagnostic radiology viewer rather than scientific imaging).
>
> How about just doing a well described, limited-in-scope
> assignment-type project with a known, immediately useful outcome ?
Sounds reasonable
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: