Hi Steve, Hi Gert, I suppose targeting experimental at first makes sense. I have not spent that much time interacting with ITK, and may be a bit short on spare cycles in the coming week, so don't believe I have that much to add. :) I remember we've agreed on the upstream "withdata" notation earlier, but in the light of recent discussions about data packaging, having a separate src:insighttoolkit(5)-data crossed my mind. That might help to parallelize the work on the packaging and diminish the weight of the source code, but that would be a different workflow for sure, so don't want to impose anything. It's just a thought. Gert Wollny, on 2020-11-16 12:49:09 +0100: > Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 13:07 -0600 schrieb Steven Robbins: > > So my thought is to drop the python package. > Agreed. Sounds good at least at first, to have a chance to have a partial but functionnal ITK 5 soon. Maybe this would be worth dropping a NEWS item about ? In case people are using this, there is always the possibility to open a wishlist bug I suppose. It seems not that ideal, but maybe necessary, given how these wrappers are a concern in terms of maintenance... Kind Regards, -- Étienne Mollier <etienne.mollier@mailoo.org> Fingerprint: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da Sent from /dev/pts/0, please excuse my verbosity.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature