[Insight-users] boring IJ's automatic testing

[Gaëtan Lehmann]

Hi Luis,

Le Wed, 26 Jul 2006 19:04:13 +0200, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com>  
a écrit:

>
> Hi Gaetan,
>
> We have acknowledged in multiple occasions your positive
> contributions to the Insight Journal as well as ITK, and we
> recognize that your efforts in developing and improving
> WrapITK are nothing short of remarkable.
>

thank you

> Giving you write access to the ITK CVS repository was a
> concrete recognition for your valuable contributions.
>
> However, your recent confrontational attitude is not the kind
> of interaction that we want to cultivate in the ITK community.
>
> We understand your frustration with the world not moving at the
> speed that you would want it to move. We would also like to see
> change happening faster, both in society and in our technical
> communities.
>
> We are very disappointed with your latest attitude towards the
> developers and maintainers of both ITK and the Insight Journal.
> Bashing on the support team is not going to make your requests
> to be answered any faster.
>
> It may not seem obvious from your point of view, but all the
> developers in ITK and IJ are also responsible for work in many
> other different projects. Delays in responding to requests are
> not due to lack of interest, but simply to the unfortunate fact
> that days only carry 24 hours.

I shoudn't have been understood here. I'm not bashing with any of the  
developers nor the maintainers of the IJ. I'm even surprised you can think  
that, and want to apologize to everybody who have found that in my mails:  
that's really not what I want to do

I'm not frustrated about the speed the things are moving. Lots of people  
are doing what they can to make things move, and I'm fine with that. What  
I deplore, for some time, is the lack of communication:
- for the contributions before the insight journal
- for contributions to the insight journal (too few reviews, no discussion  
about review or update contribution)
- for the label difinition, some time ago
- and today, for the insight journal testing system

You're talking about interactions, but from my point of view, as a  
contributor, the interactions are quite limited

As said below and several time in my emails, I understand that people are  
busy (I'm busy too) and can't do such or such things, or that they can't  
understand my emails (as surely said before, I'm not always clear in  
french, and that's surely worth in english). But Zack don't reply me, in a  
month, that he have no time to do things, or that he can't understand what  
I wrote, or something else - I even don't know if he get my mails.  
Interactions ?
What is frustrating is to spend lot of time to get a result as nice as  
possible, to finally get a broken result without the possibility to fix  
it, or even to know if it will be fixed

>
> We are aware that the IJ, being an experimental system, is far
> from perfect, and that there are a lot of improvements to be
> made in order to get it to the point where it will provide
> services smoothly and seamlessly.
>
> Revolutions are not for the impatient or for the faint of heart.
> Change does not happen by simply asking for it. In order to get
> the IJ web system that you are using today, (as boring as you
> may find it now) we have been pushing this system for more than
> three years.
>

Please don't misunderstood me, I'm not impatient, and I'm aware that  
things are taking time.

The insight journal automatic testing system is boring for only one  
reason: it is again broken.

To be clear, I think that the insight journal is a great idea (that's why  
I'm using it), and I can leave with its bugs without problem if somebody  
can fix broken stuff. Also, I'm not requesting for things to be fixed  
immediatly. Again, telling me that it can't be done know is just ok
It works very well with Julien. It's more difficult with Zack

Regards,

Gaetan


>
>
> The time for Open Access has come, our community will get there
> by using the IJ or maybe its successors.  It may take months or
> it may take decades. Evolution will continue regardless of whether
> some participants get bored with the time it takes.
>
>
>
> We look forward to work with the ITK community in order to improve
> the services that the toolkit provide, and we are committed to work
> on the IJ infrastructure to make it an efficient venue for publishing
> technical work.
>
>
>
>
>     Regards,
>
>
>
>        Luis
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------
> Gaetan Lehmann wrote:
>>  Hi,
>>  Without answer for more than a month from Zack (yes, remember the  
>> problem  with the watershed article), I decided to post the new version  
>> of WrapITK  without waiting for the reply to my questions about  
>> versions of softs  available on the automatic testing host.
>> And it is again broken:
>>   
>> http://public.kitware.com/InsightJournal/Testing/Sites/WrapITK/Insight_Journal_Automatic_Testing_System/20060726-0858-Experimental/Configure.html  
>>   ITK 2.4.0 ?! What about ITK 2.8.1, released a month ago ?
>>  I'm bored (again, that's reccurent with ITK) to ask for things to be   
>> repaired, and to not receive any reply, even to say "I have no time to  
>> fix  that now". I understand that Zack can be very busy, but perhaps  
>> someone  else can reply ? The mails where also sent the itk lists...
>> And the lack of maintenance make the journal look like work of  
>> amateurs...  not really something where we want to publish the result  
>> of months of work
>>  Regards,
>>  Gaetan
>>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Utilisant le client e-mail révolutionnaire d'Opera :  
http://www.opera.com/mail/