Skip to content

Move batch-processor to scijava org #8

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
imagejan opened this issue Dec 13, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Move batch-processor to scijava org #8

imagejan opened this issue Dec 13, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@imagejan
Copy link
Member

This repository should live in the scijava org, so that other SciJava projects can use it more easily.

@ctrueden any objections against me moving this?

@ctrueden
Copy link
Member

ctrueden commented Dec 13, 2017

Great! Please do it! But it depends on net.imagej:imagej, so should move to the imagej org, no?

@imagejan
Copy link
Member Author

@ctrueden the net.imagej:imagej dependency is just because I'm using a net.imagej.table.Table here:

https://github.com/fmi-faim/batch-processor/blob/6aa2740088c085417f90572baa944a6a0ab11702/src/main/java/org/scijava/batch/ModuleBatchProcessor.java#L11-L13

Are there any reasons why Table lives in imagej and not scijava?

@ctrueden
Copy link
Member

Are there any reasons why Table lives in imagej and not scijava?

Not any good ones. 😛

As part of SciJava 3, we can create a new scijava-table component and move the code there. (SciJava 3 will see a lot of development effort from me soon.) In the meantime, I guess it's fine to move this to the scijava org as is, with the idea that we will be ironing out that dependency wrinkle.

@imagejan
Copy link
Member Author

I just noticed that I don't have the permission to create repositories in the scijava org.
@ctrueden: would you grant me permission for this move, please? :-)

@imagejan
Copy link
Member Author

Done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants