[MINC-development] Re: glim_image

[Sylvain MILOT]

Hello,

I'm not opposed to changing the name of glim_image as long as the
current version remains online with its current name.

As for glim_image not being general enough to deal with arbitrary
dimensions, well I've used it successfully with 2mm data (91 109 91).
At least the results were very close to an analysis done with the old
traditional PET analysis template 1.34,1.72,1.5 mm^3 (128,128,80).

I haven't looked at the code recently but I maybe I should have a peak ...
Or do you mean arbitrary amongst the individual observations?

Sylvain

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Jason Lerch wrote:

>
> On Mar 2, 2004, at 12:40 AM, Andrew Janke wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Jason Lerch wrote:
> >
> >>>> On this note, glim_image and things not packaged, does anyone have
> >>>> any
> >>>> objections to glim_image being renamed (say to mincglm) and being
> >>>> stuffed into
> >>>> the base minc distro?  It is a nice pure vanilla C proggie that was
> >>>> 'peter blessed' from what I know.
> >>
> >> Urm, it's not packaged? Could have fooled me. Check the statistics
> >> directory under /software/source. And I see no particular reason to
> >> rename it, though I don't have any strong objections either.
> >
> > The general consensus on this was to package glim_image as part of an
> > extra_tools package was it not?
>
> Why create a new package called extra_tools - doesn't conglomerate
> basically fit this bill?
>
> >
> > If all that is missing is packaging this is a somewhat easy task.
> > With respect
> > to the renaming issue, I would only do this such that we can
> >
> >   a) dissociate glim_iamge from the minc_extras package
>
> Now I'm confused - you want to create a separate package for
> glim_image? That already exists, nicely autoconfed and all. I thought
> you wanted to add it to the extras package.
>
> >   b) get a bit of consistency into minc tools names.
>
> Heh. Good luck. Next thing we know you'll also advocate writing some
> documentation ;-)
>
> >
> > I'm still keen for mincglm or this too broad of a name?
>
> Isn't there some kinda rule that apps with minc in their name are
> general enough to deal with arbitrary dimensions? In which case I don't
> think that glim_image would qualify.
>
> Jason
>
> _______________________________________________
> MINC-development mailing list
> MINC-development@bic.mni.mcgill.ca
> http://www.bic.mni.mcgill.ca/mailman/listinfo/minc-development
>

---
Sylvain Milot (sylvain@bic.mni.mcgill.ca)
Positron Imaging Laboratories
Montreal Neurological Institute
Webster 2B, Room 208
Montreal, Qc., Canada, H3A 2B4
Phone: (514)-398-4965, 1996   Fax: 8948