Posted by
Alan Brooks on
Jun 30, 2014; 9:18pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/Non-Uniform-X-Y-Z-Units-Patch-tp5008492p5008503.html
Hi Curtis,
Thanks for the very helpful response.
I would caution against hacking on ImageJ1's
> calibration logic too much. Firstly, it needs to remain backwards
> compatible with existing macros and plugins. And secondly, anything which
> makes ImageJ1's calibration logic more complex at this point will also make
> ImageJ2's job of backwards compatibility more complex -- and we have enough
> on our hands already, there. I would rather see developers start migrating
> to the ImageJ2 data structures when they need things like nonlinear
> calibration, so that ImageJ1 does not have to worry about that problem at
> all, and we can all move forward together as a community.
>
I can understand the concern about changing the behavior of the calibration
and agree that waiting for IJ2 would be better. The changes I proposed were
more about the UI being consistent about accurately showing the state
calibration units using the existing API for storing & accessing
calibration metadata. I think that these changes are relatively safe since
its about the UI being true to the data model.
> I encourage you to edit the Community section of the ImageJ
> wiki's FAQ to add a question about community contributions, so that others
> will not have to ask on the mailing list next time!
>
http://wiki.imagej.net/FAQ#CommunityI made an attempt at documenting this on the FAQ as a new question
<
http://wiki.imagej.net/Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_do_I_contribute_a_bug_fix.2C_a_patch.2C_or_propose_an_idea_for_a_change_to_the_community.3F>.
Take a look and see if I got it approximately right.
Regards,
Alan
--
ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html