ImageJ

ImageJ + SourceForge

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

15 messages Options

Steve Milner-2

ImageJ + SourceForge

Good Day List,

I was wondering if there has ever been any talk about moving the development of ImageJ to SourceForge.net? Two things that seem to be missing in the ImageJ project are CVS and the ability to attract other developers to lend a hand. SourceForge helps solve both of these problems. The website, mailing list, etc.. could remain at NIH.Gov, while development of the application would point to SF CVS. It would also remove the bandwidth stress from NIG.Gov and put it on the list of mirrors at SF.

If nothing else, will there ever be source control inplace so that others can follow development and even submit back patches and improvements?

Thanks,
Steve Milner

Abramoff-Michael

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

Everyone is always free to contribute source code to ImageJ, I do. In my opinion ImageJ is a tool for the biomedical imaging community. ImageJ is not about development, nor a tool for developers.
I think the overseeing by Wayne Rasband, who has been doing this for a very long time, is essential.
Moving it to sourceforge or similar would probably emphasize new tools but de-emphasize documentation, manuals, user community etc.

My opinion only.

Michael Abramoff

Michael D. Abràmoff, MD, PhD
Assistant Professor of Clinical Ophthalmology / Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences
University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, PFP 11290C
200 Hawkins Drive Iowa City, IA 52242
USA

Tel: +1 319 384 5833. Secretary Diane Stephenson: +1 319 356 1951.
Skype michael-abramoff [hidden email]

-----Original Message-----
From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steve Milner
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 3:39 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: ImageJ + SourceForge

Good Day List,

I was wondering if there has ever been any talk about moving the development of ImageJ to SourceForge.net? Two things that seem to be missing in the ImageJ project are CVS and the ability to attract other developers to lend a hand. SourceForge helps solve both of these problems. The website, mailing list, etc.. could remain at NIH.Gov, while development of the application would point to SF CVS. It would also remove the bandwidth stress from NIG.Gov and put it on the list of mirrors at SF.

If nothing else, will there ever be source control inplace so that others can follow development and even submit back patches and improvements?

Thanks,
Steve Milner

Robert Dougherty

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

I agree that Wayne's oversight is essential. I use ImageJ as a development
platform for aeroacoustics research applications. I could not accept the
Gnu license that I believe would come along as baggage with SourceForge.
This license, if I understand it correctly, would make it effectively
impossible to sell products derived from the software. When I studied this
recently, I found the BSD open source license to much more acceptable, and
chose apply it to the plugins that I make available to others, either for
free or commercially.

Bob

Robert P. Dougherty, Ph.D.
President, OptiNav, Inc.
Phone (425) 467-1118
Fax (425) 467-1119
www.optinav.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Abramoff-Michael
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 1:50 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: ImageJ + SourceForge
>
> Everyone is always free to contribute source code to ImageJ, I do. In my
> opinion ImageJ is a tool for the biomedical imaging community. ImageJ is
> not about development, nor a tool for developers.
> I think the overseeing by Wayne Rasband, who has been doing this for a
> very long time, is essential.
> Moving it to sourceforge or similar would probably emphasize new tools but
> de-emphasize documentation, manuals, user community etc.
>
> My opinion only.
>
>
> Michael Abramoff
>
> Michael D. Abràmoff, MD, PhD
> Assistant Professor of Clinical Ophthalmology / Assistant Professor of
> Electrical and Computer Engineering
> Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences
> University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, PFP 11290C
> 200 Hawkins Drive Iowa City, IA 52242
> USA
>
> Tel: +1 319 384 5833. Secretary Diane Stephenson: +1 319 356 1951.
> Skype michael-abramoff [hidden email]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Steve Milner
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 3:39 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: ImageJ + SourceForge
>
> Good Day List,
>
> I was wondering if there has ever been any talk about moving the
> development of ImageJ to SourceForge.net? Two things that seem to be
> missing in the ImageJ project are CVS and the ability to attract other
> developers to lend a hand. SourceForge helps solve both of these problems.
> The website, mailing list, etc.. could remain at NIH.Gov, while
> development of the application would point to SF CVS. It would also remove
> the bandwidth stress from NIG.Gov and put it on the list of mirrors at SF.
>
> If nothing else, will there ever be source control inplace so that others
> can follow development and even submit back patches and improvements?
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Milner

Steve Milner-2

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

Good Day Michael and List,

I in no way meant to insinuate change control to another person. If the project was hosted at sourceforge Wayne would still have control over all it's aspects. Wayne Rasband has and am sure will do an excellent job, no doubt about that. From an open source software developer standpoint it can be harder to get involved in projects that don't have some way of source control to base patches and enhancements off of.

Steve

________________________________

From: ImageJ Interest Group on behalf of Abramoff-Michael
Sent: Tue 10/11/2005 4:49 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

Everyone is always free to contribute source code to ImageJ, I do. In my opinion ImageJ is a tool for the biomedical imaging community. ImageJ is not about development, nor a tool for developers.
I think the overseeing by Wayne Rasband, who has been doing this for a very long time, is essential.
Moving it to sourceforge or similar would probably emphasize new tools but de-emphasize documentation, manuals, user community etc.

My opinion only.

Michael Abramoff

Michael D. Abràmoff, MD, PhD
Assistant Professor of Clinical Ophthalmology / Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences
University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, PFP 11290C
200 Hawkins Drive Iowa City, IA 52242
USA

Tel: +1 319 384 5833. Secretary Diane Stephenson: +1 319 356 1951.
Skype michael-abramoff [hidden email]

-----Original Message-----
From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steve Milner
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 3:39 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: ImageJ + SourceForge

Good Day List,

I was wondering if there has ever been any talk about moving the development of ImageJ to SourceForge.net? Two things that seem to be missing in the ImageJ project are CVS and the ability to attract other developers to lend a hand. SourceForge helps solve both of these problems. The website, mailing list, etc.. could remain at NIH.Gov, while development of the application would point to SF CVS. It would also remove the bandwidth stress from NIG.Gov and put it on the list of mirrors at SF.

If nothing else, will there ever be source control inplace so that others can follow development and even submit back patches and improvements?

Thanks,
Steve Milner

Steve Milner-2

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

The GNU license is not a requirement for SourceForge projects. They accept public domain as an acceptable license. It would in no way change any licensening or ownership of the code. It would just provide CVS, mirrors for downloading, etc..

Steve

________________________________

From: ImageJ Interest Group on behalf of Robert Dougherty
Sent: Tue 10/11/2005 5:32 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

I agree that Wayne's oversight is essential. I use ImageJ as a development
platform for aeroacoustics research applications. I could not accept the
Gnu license that I believe would come along as baggage with SourceForge.
This license, if I understand it correctly, would make it effectively
impossible to sell products derived from the software. When I studied this
recently, I found the BSD open source license to much more acceptable, and
chose apply it to the plugins that I make available to others, either for
free or commercially.

Bob

Robert P. Dougherty, Ph.D.
President, OptiNav, Inc.
Phone (425) 467-1118
Fax (425) 467-1119
www.optinav.com

dscho

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Robert Dougherty

Hi,

On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Robert Dougherty wrote:

> I agree that Wayne's oversight is essential. I use ImageJ as a development
> platform for aeroacoustics research applications. I could not accept the
> Gnu license that I believe would come along as baggage with SourceForge.
> This license, if I understand it correctly, would make it effectively
> impossible to sell products derived from the software. When I studied this
> recently, I found the BSD open source license to much more acceptable, and
> chose apply it to the plugins that I make available to others, either for
> free or commercially.

This is wrong, and also misleading. If you're really interested in finding
out, there are plenty of places to read about the GPL and why it is so
"restrictive".

Hth,
Dscho

dscho

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

Hi,

On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Steve Milner wrote:

> I was wondering if there has ever been any talk about moving the
> development of ImageJ to SourceForge.net?

FWIW I found ImageJ on SourceForge a while back. I turned out to be a
Russian guy who just copied a certain version, and set up a PayPal
account. Ugly.

> If nothing else, will there ever be source control inplace so that
> others can follow development and even submit back patches and
> improvements?

I have a private git repository to track the versions, but I don't think
that Wayne wants to set up a repository.

Ciao,
Dscho

Winnok H. De Vos

getResult("Label")

In reply to this post by dscho

Dear all

If you want to do a batch analysis and add ROI's from one image analysis to
the ROI manager how can you make sure (in macro language) only the results
from that single analysis are chosen? I would like to keep a single
resultstable with the total analysis of all images but since the reultstable
gets appended with each analysis my ROI manager gets the values from the
previous analysis. I wanted to use getResults("Label",i) but it doesn't work
I guess because it concerns a string. Is there a way to get a string out of
the results table and compare it to the one you need? Or is there another
way to circumvent this problem, e.g. by saving and closing the resultstable
each time and afterwards concatenating these resultstables to a single? I
searched the archive but only found a similar titled question and no answer.
Many thanks in advance.
Kind regards,

winnok

Steve Milner-2

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

Yes, that is very ugly. My question then would be how does someone submit patches without the patches being versions old? Also, is there currently some way to get outside developers interested in lending a hand?

Thanks,
Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of
Johannes Schindelin
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 7:13 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

Hi,

On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Steve Milner wrote:

> I was wondering if there has ever been any talk about moving the
> development of ImageJ to SourceForge.net?

FWIW I found ImageJ on SourceForge a while back. I turned out to be a
Russian guy who just copied a certain version, and set up a PayPal
account. Ugly.

> If nothing else, will there ever be source control inplace so that
> others can follow development and even submit back patches and
> improvements?

I have a private git repository to track the versions, but I don't think
that Wayne wants to set up a repository.

Ciao,
Dscho

Eric Janiaud

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

Hi all,

I d like to add this to the discussion:

ImageJ is not limited to biomedical applications. For instance, it is
widely used among physicists. They have their own needs which leads to
a lot of plugins.

If the 'core' of ImageJ is very well maintained by Wayne, it is not
the case for the plugins. It is often quite difficult to know if some
plugin already 'published' would be useful. Moreover that they are
sometimes just referred as link to homepage. A better control and a
better documentation would turn out to be a great thing indeed.

Thanks
Eric

--
Dr. Eric Janiaud
School of Physics
Trinity College Dublin
College Green
Dublin 2
Ireland

NEW : Phone: 00353 - 1 - 608 8453
Fax: 00353 - 1 - 671 1759

Robert Dougherty

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by dscho

It appears that not all projects on SourceForge are covered by GNU licenses,
but most are. I'm concerned that, even ImageJ itself is kept in the public
domain, a connection with SourceForge would encourage plugin authors to use
the GPL. As for the implications of various open source licenses, the most
useful reference I've come across is "Open Source Software Licenses:
Perspectives of the End User and the Software Developer," by Paul H. Arne
and John C. Yates, The Computer & Internet Lawyer, Vol 22 No. 8 August 2005.
It is difficult to find it free on line, but a similar document is at
http://www.oslawblog.com/2004/10/white-paper-open-source-software.html.
Part of my take-away message was that GPL is popular with programmers who
think software should be free. Their employers may have a different view.

Regarding plugin maintenance and cataloging, I agree that there are
problems. I'm constantly posting messages to this list pointing out that a
plugin on my site does X in response to a question on the list seeking a
plugin that does X.

I don't know what to do when someone requests capability Y that does not
quite exist and would be easy and fun to provide, but I can't justify doing
it for free and nobody seems to be stepping up. I'm trying to create a
semi-commercial mechanism for this situation, but I'm reluctant to promote
it and it needs some tuning.

Maintenance of my free plugins can be hard to prioritize for things that I
don't need and nobody is paying for.

Maybe SourceForge is the answer for some of these issues, but it would be
necessary to overcome some fear and ignorance. In any case, Wayne's opinion
is the one that matters.

Bob

Sarel Botha

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Robert Dougherty
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:24 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: ImageJ + SourceForge
>
> It appears that not all projects on SourceForge are covered by GNU
> licenses,
> but most are. I'm concerned that, even ImageJ itself is kept in the
> public
> domain, a connection with SourceForge would encourage plugin authors

to
> use
> the GPL. As for the implications of various open source licenses, the
> most
> useful reference I've come across is "Open Source Software Licenses:
> Perspectives of the End User and the Software Developer," by Paul H.
Arne
> and John C. Yates, The Computer & Internet Lawyer, Vol 22 No. 8 August
> 2005.
> It is difficult to find it free on line, but a similar document is at
>
http://www.oslawblog.com/2004/10/white-paper-open-source-software.html.
> Part of my take-away message was that GPL is popular with programmers
who
> think software should be free. Their employers may have a different
view.

<snip>

Some developers are already hosting their ImageJ plugins at SF:
http://ij-plugins.sourceforge.net

It appears that they are using various licenses for these plugins:
Apache 2, LGPL and Public Domain.

Sarel

Steve Milner-2

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

> I'm concerned that, even ImageJ itself is kept in the public
> domain, a connection with SourceForge would encourage plugin
> authors to use the GPL.

I personally think that it would encourage more plugin development of which a majority would probably be GPL. This wouldn't be a problem since there would be no plugin already created. It then allows for comercial users of the software to provide the GPL'd plugins as is without modification or write their own comercial variants.

<snip>

> I don't know what to do when someone requests capability Y that does not
> quite exist and would be easy and fun to provide, but I can't justify doing
> it for free and nobody seems to be stepping up.

I think that this is where SF.net could help. Since there would be a larger pool of developers there is a better chance for enhancements on free and open plugins.

> I'm trying to create a
> semi-commercial mechanism for this situation, but I'm reluctant to promote
> it and it needs some tuning.

That sounds interesting!

> Maintenance of my free plugins can be hard to prioritize for things that I
> don't need and nobody is paying for.

> Maybe SourceForge is the answer for some of these issues, but it would be
> necessary to overcome some fear and ignorance.

Yes, SourceForge doesn't force anyone to use a license. In fact, they have Public Domain as a license option when submitting projects. In any case, my biggest concern is how to get other developers involved (which is why I have been suggesting source control). I can't wrap my head around giving back code without having a method in place that allows for tracking Main Branch changes. If I have latest snapshot A, and the current development code is Z and I make modifications and bug fixes to A ... how can I get this to Z without having to recode? It just doesn't seem to lend itself for outside developer collaboration. I am personally a software developer, so it's where my point of view comes from :-).

> In any case, Wayne's opinion is the one that matters.

True. I talked to Wayne off list and he indicated he does not seen the need
for source control.

By the way, I'd like to thank the list for having a reasonable discussion on this! (and for not booing me off! :-))

Thanks,
Steve

taintedham-mailinglists

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

I'd like to add that I'm willing to host source
control on one of my servers. Without fee, I'm very
pleased with ImageJ, it would be an honor. I'm
currently hosting a couple of projects for my work as
well as some other small projects.

I can host either SVN or CVS. I also have CVS and SVN
email notification so people interested in development
can stay up to date with source changes.

No need to move anything, just link on the website.
Administration would be straight forward.

If Wayne is interested, contact me on this address.

Thanks,
--Dave Horner

Steve Milner-2

Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

In reply to this post by Steve Milner-2

That would be excellent!

Steve Milner

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ImageJ Interest Group [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of
> David Horner
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 9:21 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: ImageJ + SourceForge
>
>
> I'd like to add that I'm willing to host source
> control on one of my servers. Without fee, I'm very
> pleased with ImageJ, it would be an honor. I'm
> currently hosting a couple of projects for my work as
> well as some other small projects.
>
> I can host either SVN or CVS. I also have CVS and SVN
> email notification so people interested in development
> can stay up to date with source changes.
>
> No need to move anything, just link on the website.
> Administration would be straight forward.
>
> If Wayne is interested, contact me on this address.
>
> Thanks,
> --Dave Horner
>