[MINC-development] Welcome

[Robert VINCENT]

Hi everyone,

Welcome to the list.  I thought I'd start off by posting a few guesses
about the goals for MINC development.

To test my understanding of the current state of things, I'd like to see
if there is consensus about the following claims:

1. MINC could be better documented.
2. MINC would benefit from a more complete set of automated tests.
3. MINC requires extensions to support files larger than core.
4. MINC requires extensions to support files larger than 2 GB.
5. MINC requires extensions to run on 64-bit architectures.
6. Given #3, block-structuring MINC data will improve file access speed.
7. MINC must remain backward compatible with existing data.

I've intentionally used MINC as a blanket term for the file format,
libraries, and dependant applications.

Claims #3, #4, and #5 are related but not necessarily completely
overlapping.  There are probably people running on 32-bit architectures
who need to process large files, and there are people with 64-bit systems
that still don't have enough core to process huge files in memory.

My undertanding is that Jason is currently spending some time on #5,
making MINC tools run in a 64 bit world on SGI.  The The MICe group seems
to be focused on #3 and #6.  Has anyone invested much time in these other
things?  Is anyone aware of work by the NetCDF group to address any of
these issues?

What other major or minor tasks are obvious to people?

Thanks!

	-bert