[Insight-developers] ITK 4.0 release clean up

[M Stauffer -V-]

Matt, that all sounds good. Thanks! 

>Hi Michael, Brian,
>
>I also think it would be better to clean up the names now, but we have
>run out of time.  We should definitely make the change, though.
>
>Thank you for coming to consensus on v4.  There was not enthusiasm
>about v4 at the TCon, but better ideas were not put forth.  v4 sounds
>fine to me, and as Arnaud recommended, we can use the same for the
>doxygen version tag.  We could talk to Arnaud about a possible change
>to V4, too -- it would not be a huge issue.
>
>It will be an inconvenience to the users to change their code, but we
>will not have many users if they cannot figure out what is going on.
>It would be foolish to not make a very important change for the sake
>of a month's users to the detriment of the next ten year's of use and
>development that follows.  There are many improvements that users
>should access with ITK v4.0.0, but the state of level sets and
>registration is, in reality, only RC or beta.  They have come a long
>way, but to freeze API here would just make a mess permanent.
>
>I will put together a patch that adds a CMake warning if the new
>registration or level sets modules are enabled.  Similar to
>ITK_USE_REVIEW=ON in ITKv3, it will warn that the API is not stable
>yet.  There was agreement to hold off backwards incompatibility until
>June at the Bethesda meeting, and to use BIG BOLD LETTERS that it is
>not to be expected in the release notes, but this should be helpful,
>too.
>
>Thanks,
>Matt
>
>On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:11 PM, brian avants <stnava at gmail.com> wrote:
>> personally, i think it would be better to clean up the names
>>
>> it's kind of ugly now and is likely to be confusing
>>
>> however, there was strong resistance to this on t-con , mainly from
>> bill, i think
>>
>> v4 was also not met with enthusiasm
>>
>> brian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM, M Stauffer -V- 
><mstauff at verizon.net> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Should we do the renaming of the new registartion framework 
>before the
>>> release? Brian and I have been thinking about using the 
>same 'v4' suffix
>>> that the new LevelSets framework uses. This would be nice 
>and short and
>>> have some continuity. Did you talk about that in tcon last week?
>>>
>>> So, it'd be Metricsv4 and RegistrationMethodsv4 for the modules, and
>>> itkImageToImageMetricv4, etc, for the classes.
>>>
>>> I think 'V4' would look better than 'v4', but since 
>LevelSetsv4 already
>>> uses 'v4', we should use 'v4'.
>>>
>>> -M
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: insight-developers-bounces at itk.org
>>>>[mailto:insight-developers-bounces at itk.org] On Behalf Of 
>Matt McCormick
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:59 PM
>>>>To: ITK; insight-users at itk.org
>>>>Subject: [Insight-developers] ITK 4.0 release clean up
>>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>cc19bacb has been tagged as v4.0rc05.  As discussed during 
>the weekly
>>>>TCon, please refrain from merging any new features until after the
>>>>4.0.0 release, which
>>>>is scheduled for December 20th:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_Release_4/ReleaseSchedules
>>>>
>>>>Please have all fixes in by Sunday the 18th for a nightly
>>>>dashboard build,
>>>>tagging the 19th, and tarball release on the 20th.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Dashboard pimples to pop:
>>>>
>>>>- TemporalProcessObjectTest failure:
>>>>https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2862
>>>>
>>>>- VideoSourceTest failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2863
>>>>
>>>>- itkKdTreeTest11 failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2864
>>>>
>>>>- itkSimpleImageRegistrationTest on gcc-4.4.4 Shared Release:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2865
>>>>
>>>>- RGBColormapTest_* failures:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2866
>>>>
>>>>- vnl_test_sparse_lst_sqr_function failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2867
>>>>
>>>>- itkMRIBiasFieldCorrectionFilterTest failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2868
>>>>
>>>>- itkLSMImageIOTest failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2869
>>>>
>>>>- itkMultiThreaderEnvTest{123,88} failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2870
>>>>
>>>>- itkTimeVaryingVelocityFieldImageRegistrationTest failure:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2871
>>>>
>>>>- SunOS-g++ intmax_t build errors:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2872
>>>>
>>>>- SunOS-g++ type conversion warnings:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2873
>>>>
>>>>- Video shadow warnings:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2874
>>>>
>>>>- JointHistogramMutualInformation registration tests memory leaks:
>>>> https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2875
>>>>
>>>>- itkQuasiNewtonObjectOptimizerRegistrationTest3 
>uninitialized memory
>>>>conditional: https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2876
>>>>
>>>>- itkTransformTest uninitialized memory conditional:
>>>>https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2877
>>>>
>>>>- itkFloatingPointExceptionsTest5 potential memory leak, freeing
>>>>invalid memory: https://issues.itk.org/jira/browse/ITK-2878
>>>>
>>>>Cheers to Bill Lorensen for fixing the FFTConvolution Sobel test
>>>>failure before I could create a ticket.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Matt
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Powered by www.kitware.com
>>>>
>>>>Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>>>>http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>>>>
>>>>Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
>>>>http://kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>>>>
>>>>Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
>>>>http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>>>>
>>>>Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>>>>http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>>>