Re: Change InsightToolkit to use Review/Statistics?
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 20:35 -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:43:03PM -0400, Paul Novotny wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-10-17 at 23:04 -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm considering switching to the new refactored Statistics classes in
> > > ITK. This is an API-breaking move so I'd like to hear of any concerns
> > > before implementing this.
> > >
> > > The change would be done for version 3.20 of InsightToolkit (currently
> > > stuck in the NEW queue) and not for version 3.18. So this is not
> > > targeted for squeeze.
> > >
> > > My main motivation for doing this is to enable packaging elastix
> > > (http://elastix.isi.uu.nl/). Note also that ITK 4.0 will use
> > > the new statistics so code has to change eventually; this would
> > > just force the change one version earlier as 3.20 is the last
> > > release destined for ITK 3.x.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> > >
> > > -Steve
> >
> > Adding Review means you can also add WrapITK. Something I think is a
> > good idea, but others may not.
>
> That's an interesting idea: make two API-breaking moves at the same
> time! :-)
>
> On the other hand, ITK v4 is moving to WrapITK for wrapping. So this
> also is a change that will happen eventually.
>
> Will this break anything in Debian? I can't find any reverse-depends
> on the java, python, or tcl bindings.
I don't know of anything it would break.
If you decide to add WrapITK I would be willing to help if you need it.
It shouldn't be too hard though, I have done it numerous times for
Ubuntu.
Although, one issue that comes up is what dimensions and datatypes to
wrap. I use a lot of datatypes in my work, plus 4D data, so the package
gets over 100MB, and much larger when installed. It might be nice to
have multiple packages to pick from depending on your needs?
-Paul
Reply to: