[Insight-developers] Need to add images for new tests to Data -- how to do that in a Gerrit topic?

[Bill Lorensen]

First, I do not agree that the system is crippled. It could certainly
be improved.

Adding complexity is not an improvement.

I suggest we split the data into large, small and baselines. Keep the
small and baselines with the repository (the way it used to be, no
submodule). Use MIDAS for the large data.

Bill

On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com> wrote:
> Gaetan,
>
>
> 2010/11/5 Gaëtan Lehmann <gaetan.lehmann at jouy.inra.fr>
>>
>> This method looks interesting for the large images.
>> IMO, it doesn't look that interesting for the small test images we are
>> used to have in Testing/Data, compared to a direct inclusion in the ITK
>> repository.
>>
>> The procedure to add a new image on midas looks quite complex also -
>> nothing close to the "cvs add" we had before ITK 4 and git.
>>
>
>
> The method we use to have with cvs was certainly
> simple, but also quite disorganized.  A quick look
> at the Testing/Data/Input directory will show that
> we had no systematic organization for the images
> that get included in that directory.
>
> Starting by the fact that tree images,
> take half of the size of the entire directory.    :-(
>
> * GradientRecursiveGaussianImageFilterTest.mha (1.5Mb)
> * TensorsCorpusCallosum.raw (3.7Mb)
> *  DwiCorpusCallosum.raw  (4.8Mb)
>
> and each one of those giant images are used in a
> single tests (out of the 1,700+ tests that we have).
>
>
>>
>> Do we really need a new layer of complexity like this one? I don't think
>> so.
>
>
> It depends on whether the added complexity
> is helping to overcome the limitations of the
> simpler older method.
>
>
>>
>> Things should be kept simple when possible.
>>
>
> Simplicity is great,
> when it doesn't implies a crippled system.
>
> This is our only chance to create the ITK for the next
> ten years. If we are going to claim to provide support
> for large images, we should test with large images.
>
> Currently we barely have 3D tests,
> and we are talking about providing serious
> support for 4D images.
>
> This level of testing infrastructure requires
> a more scalable method.
>
>
>
>       Luis
>
>
>