[Insight-developers] ITK 2.8 Repository Tagged & Branched

Hans Johnson hans-johnson at uiowa.edu
Tue Jun 6 13:38:16 EDT 2006 

Julien,

Categories for each paper would also be helpful.  For example, I may  
want to query for all papers on segmentation, but not on  
registration.  People could then sign up as reviewers for all IJ  
documents that are on segmentation and are desired to be included in  
Insight/Code/BasicFilters.

2 sets of categories:

1) Relevant topics
2) Desired audience (Insight developers, image processing end users)   
i.e. is this submission a stand-alone tool, or a new feature for ITK?

Just my 2c.

Hans


On Jun 6, 2006, at 11:01 AM, Julien Jomier wrote:

> Hi Gaetan,
>
> Reviewing a paper can be interesting but sometimes it can be really  
> painful (talking from my own experience here). We just have to  
> accept that this is a necessary step.
>
> Couple of things we can do in order to improve the review process:
>
> 1) Send automatic email to the users/developers lists when a new  
> publication is submitted to the IJ (Luis had this idea before and  
> it's almost implemented).
>
> 2) Have an editor for the IJ who will select the appropriate  
> reviewers and set a deadline when the reviews are due. (I tend to  
> wait until the last moment to review a paper and if I don't get a  
> reminder then I tend to forget about it...)
>
> 3) Send automatic email when a paper had no/few reviews for a long  
> time to encourage users and developers to sign up for reviews.
>
> 4) Publish a newsletter (or something like that) with the new  
> contributions and the names of the reviewers. This will somehow  
> reward reviewers (as well as authors).
>
> If you have any other ideas I'm open to suggestions.
>
> For the last 6 months we've received 21 publications for ITK, which  
> makes about one publication a week (not that bad...).
> We didn't envision using the IJ as a tollgate for ITK contributions  
> in the first place and I really think if we improve the IJ to fit  
> this design it will get better.
>
> Julien
>
> Gaetan Lehmann wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>> To be clear, I thought IJ was a great idea, to improve  
>> contribution quality, and to valorize (I'm not sure that the right  
>> word) my work - show to everybody the work done, and have  
>> something about ITK to put in my evaluation form.
>> That's why I contributed articles and reviews.
>> That's right that there is some things to change in the interface  
>> to make IJ much better, but I don't think it will significantly  
>> change the numbers of reviews. Reviewing a contribution take some  
>> time, and it seems that the number of people ready to do that is  
>> quite small. Even official ITK developers are rarely taking the  
>> time to review the articles. How do you think to convince the  
>> normal user to do that ?
>> With the results of the first months of the IJ, are you sure that  
>> working more on it is a good use of your time ?
>> Gaetan
>> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 16:29:57 +0200, Julien Jomier  
>> <julien.jomier at kitware.com> wrote:
>>> Gaetan,
>>>
>>> I agree with you the IJ is not reaching is full potential.
>>> However, the main issue at this point is not the number of  
>>> publications but the amount of reviews for new code and this is  
>>> slowing down the process. Moreover, the submission of new  
>>> revisions is somehow painful.
>>>
>>> Here are some features that we want to implement (hopefully soon)  
>>> for the Insight Journal.
>>>
>>> 1) Separate CVS access for submission into the IJ so bug fixes  
>>> can be quickly fixed without a need for a resubmission.
>>>
>>> 2) Improved review design for submission to ITK (and other  
>>> toolkits). The idea is to assign two/three main reviewers and set  
>>> a deadline for the reviews (with email reminders). This should  
>>> speedup the integration into the toolkit. Also, at submission  
>>> time, you will be able to specify if this is a new feature or bug  
>>> fix, etc...
>>>
>>> I'm also collecting ideas/features on how to improve the IJ. Feel  
>>> free to send me an email or log a feature request at www.itk.org/ 
>>> Bug (there is a project for Insight Journal).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Julien
>>>
>>> Gaetan Lehmann wrote:
>>>>  Luis,
>>>>  Do you still think the Insight Journal is the proper way to get  
>>>> new code ?
>>>> While some interesting contributions have been published to the  
>>>> journal, the abscence of discussion about those contributions  
>>>> completely kills the contribution process. The new code seems to  
>>>> not be much integrated than before to the toolkit - even bug  
>>>> fixes and feature/performance improvement are not. After several  
>>>> months of existance, it seems that the journal is not able to  
>>>> reach the minimum amount of publishers and reviewers to work  
>>>> smoothly.
>>>> Perhaps the ITK community is too small for this kind of process ?
>>>> Don't you think that going back to committing directly new  
>>>> classes in the repository should increase the development  
>>>> dynamic of the toolkit ?
>>>>  Regards,
>>>>  Gaetan
>>>>   On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 14:21:03 +0200, Luis Ibanez  
>>>> <luis.ibanez at kitware.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The CVS repository has been tagged and branched for ITK 2.8.
>>>>>
>>>>> The repository is open for commits again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please keep in mind that only bug fixes, new tests, and
>>>>> performance improvements should be committed directly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any new classes, or API changes should be posted first as
>>>>> technical reports to the Insight Journal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please let us know if you find any problems,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>      Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         Luis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Insight-developers mailing list
>>>>> Insight-developers at itk.org
>>>>> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>>>>    --Gaëtan Lehmann
>>>> Biologie du Développement et de la Reproduction
>>>> INRA de Jouy-en-Josas (France)
>>>> tel: +33 1 34 65 29 66    fax: 01 34 65 29 09
>>>> http://voxel.jouy.inra.fr
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Insight-developers mailing list
>>>> Insight-developers at itk.org
>>>> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>>>>
>> --Gaëtan Lehmann
>> Biologie du Développement et de la Reproduction
>> INRA de Jouy-en-Josas (France)
>> tel: +33 1 34 65 29 66    fax: 01 34 65 29 09
>> http://voxel.jouy.inra.fr
>> _______________________________________________
>> Insight-developers mailing list
>> Insight-developers at itk.org
>> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>
> _______________________________________________
> Insight-developers mailing list
> Insight-developers at itk.org
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>

More information about the Insight-developers mailing list