[IGSTK-Developers] FW: Tcon tomorrow and comments from Stephen Aylward re toolkit and logger class

[Kevin Cleary]

Hi all:

Note that Stephen and Julien will not be able to make the tcon tomorrow due
to a schedule conflict as noted below.

But that is OK as we have plenty to discuss and I have seen some email
traffic from Julien this week.

I wanted to update the schedule on the Wiki but could not find my login so I
have contacted Andy for this information. In the meantime the one status
item I want to update is that it looks like the week of April 11-15 is
better for most for the six month review meeting - I will bring this topic
up briefly tomorrow

Also please make note of Stephen's comments below my signature re the logger
class - I think some of this may fall in Sohan's area - but I am not sure

Talk to the rest of you tomorrow I hope!

Kevin

------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Cleary, Ph.D.                        Work phone: 202-687-8253
Associate Professor                        Work fax: 202-784-3479
Deputy Director  
                            
Imaging Science and Information Systems (ISIS) Center
Department of Radiology                    Pager: 202-901-2033
Georgetown University Medical Center       Cell phone: 202-294-3409
2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 603           Home phone: 301-299-0788
Washington, DC, 20007                      Home fax: 301-299-0789
 
ISIS center: www.isis.georgetown.edu
Research group: www.caimr.georgetown.edu
WashCAS: www.washcas.org
Email: cleary at georgetown.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen R. Aylward [mailto:aylward at unc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 10:54 AM
To: cleary at georgetown.edu; Julien Jomier
Subject: Re: TMI Special Issue

April 11-15 are very good days for me!

Julien and I will not be able to make the tcon tomorrow since we have to 
give a talk at 1:30.  Sorry.

I did compile the IGSTK toolkit last night - it went very smoothly. 
All of the tests passed.

For the logger class, should we have a "normal" priority level - all are 
either a form of warning/error or not-set?

For the logger class, should there also be categories of messages - like 
"state change" messages, "parameter change" messages, etc.   This might 
help when post-processing logs to generate high-level reports...  So, 
there can be a "normal" priority message of a state change...

Stephen

-- 
===========================================================
Dr. Stephen R. Aylward
Associate Professor of Radiology
Adjunct Associate Professor of Computer Science and Surgery
http://caddlab.rad.unc.edu
aylward at unc.edu
(919) 966-9695