[Insight-developers] Re: Integrating WrapITK into ITK CVS

[Zachary Pincus]

Hi folks,

I feel like a bit of a troublemaker to have brought up all of the  
issues about changing the CableSwig part of the wrapping process, but  
then being utterly unable to donate any time to proofing out the  
feasibility of such changes. In any case, I would hope that any  
future CableSwig changes could be done transparently, in terms of the  
API generated for the wrappers. And as (unless timetables were set  
during the tcon) the CableSwig-related changes might not be  
forthcoming, I think it would be good to get WrapITK integrated  
before those changes.

One question -- the full backwards-compatibility policy makes good  
sense for ITK as it is at this point a pretty mature code-base.  
However, it's possible that ITK benefitted somewhat from *not* having  
such a strictly-adhered-to policy in the early releases. While  
WrapITK is definitely ready-for-prime-time, I would be a bit  
uncomfortable to commit whole-heartedly to the API exactly as it is;  
especially with regard to some language-specific features. (E.g.  
there are some useful but perhaps too-clever parts of how the  
libraries are loaded in Python, and so forth.) Do you all feel that  
the full backwards compatibility requirements will apply to WrapITK  
immediately? (Not that I'm proposing wanton breakage, but after  
WrapITK is integrated and sees more use in different conditions, we  
might learn some things that only non-backward-compatible API changes  
can accomplish.)

Zach



On Sep 2, 2006, at 4:38 PM, Luis Ibanez wrote:

>
> Hi Gaetan,
>
> That is great news.
>
> Should we hold on modifications related to CableSwig
> and upload the current version of WrapITK into ITK ?
>
> We talked about this during the tcon, and the only concern was
> the possibility that the future proposed changes to CableSwig
> may change the API of the wrapping. Do you think this is a real
> source of concern ?
>
>
> Please let us know,
>
>
>    Thanks
>
>
>       Luis
>
>
>
> ---------------------
> Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have made the changes I wanted to do. Quite surprisingly, I have  
>> even
>> turn on some features that we had disabled in the past, because of  
>> build
>> or runtime errors. Not sure what happened - perhaps Brad or Bill have
>> fixed some stuff in cableswig ? - but that's nice :-)
>> All the tests are passing, with the 3 languages. I think  
>> everything is
>> ready to move WrapITK to ITK cvs.
>> However I'm not sure what is the right procedure to do that.  
>> Please let me
>> know how you would like to proceed.
>> Thanks,
>> Gaetan
>> PS: sorry for the double post - the list is asking me to remove  
>> some  recipients
>> Le Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:24:25 +0200, Luis Ibanez  
>> <luis.ibanez at kitware.com>
>> a écrit:
>>> We need to put together a schedule + transition plan
>>>    on how to bring WrapITK into the ITK CVS repository.
>>>     For example:
>>>        September 1st:  Commit WrapITK code under
>>>                       Insight/Wrapping. This include
>>>                       a pre and post CVS tag. We may
>>>                       freeze the repository for a couple
>>>                       of days in order to do this.
>>>        September 10:   Complete configuration changes
>>>                       on CMakeLists.txt files for
>>>                       making WrapITK an option
>>>        September 15:   Enable WrapITK as default
>>>                       wrapping in several platforms
>>>                       on Dashboard machines.
>>>                       Linux gcc 3.4, 4.0 and VC++ 7.1.
>>>        September 25:   Enable WraptITK as default
>>>                       wapping in all Dashboard machines
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Insight-developers mailing list
> Insight-developers at itk.org
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers