WIP: Purge SimpleITK #1436
Closed
WIP: Purge SimpleITK #1436
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@effigies Sorry to get back to you late on this, but I think we should actually git rid of these methods from the master branch. They are not required for the main recon-all workflow itself, but were used as an add on to make some experimental tests easier. If you'd like to keep them, I can review the changes and get back to you. I'll make a PR for removing these here in a couple minutes. |
|
Nope, feel free to kill the functions. My only interest here is getting SimpleITK out, since it's not easily available for Linux users and it's not an official nipype dependency. Please put a "Closes #1436" in your description so this PR closes when yours is accepted. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@dgellis90 For your validation.
RecodeLabelMapwas straightforward. Whatcenter_volumewas doing is somewhat ambiguous (see questions on #1432), so this is a provisional rewrite.Fixes #1431.