Skip to content

Conversation

@FredLoney
Copy link
Contributor

This branch implements the JoinNode, itersource and synchronize enhancements described in https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nipy-user/CB3n0HwGT9c. A new chapter was added to the Users Guide. The join_test file exercises every JoinNode variation I could think of.

FredLoney added 30 commits March 20, 2013 13:31
Conflicts:
	examples/smri_ants_registration.py
@mwaskom
Copy link
Member

mwaskom commented Sep 7, 2013

This looks very interesting! For now, a quick note to ask if you can edit the __init__.py files so that one can do:

from nipype import JoinNode

We are trying to flatten the package a bit from the user's perspective.

@satra
Copy link
Member

satra commented Sep 7, 2013

@FredLoney - this is great - give me a few days to review this. but i think this will allow us to rewrite some workflows we were not able to do as a single step. i also want to make sure we have very clear examples of how to use this.

@FredLoney
Copy link
Contributor Author

I updated the github.com/FredLoney/nipype.git join_itersource_synchronize branch. I don't know if I need to resubmit the pull request.

Fred

From: Michael Waskom <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: nipy/nipype <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Friday, September 6, 2013 5:17 PM
To: nipy/nipype <nipype@noreply.github.commailto:nipype@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Me <loneyf@ohsu.edumailto:loneyf@ohsu.edu>
Subject: Re: [nipype] JoinNode itersource synchronize (#643)

This looks very interesting! For now, a quick note to ask if you can edit the init.py files so that one can do:

from nipype import JoinNode

We are trying to flatten the package a bit from the user's perspective.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/643#issuecomment-23977244.

@mwaskom
Copy link
Member

mwaskom commented Sep 9, 2013

It automatically updates the pull request. But can you also add the import to nipype/__init__.py.

A good check would be to have the doctest do

from nipype import JoinNode

@FredLoney
Copy link
Contributor Author

Added import and changed the doctests.

Fred

From: Michael Waskom <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: nipy/nipype <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Monday, September 9, 2013 10:34 AM
To: nipy/nipype <nipype@noreply.github.commailto:nipype@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Me <loneyf@ohsu.edumailto:loneyf@ohsu.edu>
Subject: Re: [nipype] JoinNode itersource synchronize (#643)

It automatically updates the pull request. But can you also add the import to nipype/init.py.

A good check would be to have the doctest do

from nipype import JoinNode


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/643#issuecomment-24098103.

@satra
Copy link
Member

satra commented Sep 9, 2013

@FredLoney - i'm trying to rebase/merge this with the current master and it's going to take some effort as this contains other PRs merged into this as well, which have not been merged into master. if you have a good way of cherrypicking only the joinnode/itersource components into a separate branch that will be very useful.

@FredLoney
Copy link
Contributor Author

I rebased the branch from the Nipype master just before submission. The pull request should be from the github.com:FredLoney/nipype.git join_itersource_synchronize branch, not the master branch. Is there a way to verify that?

Fred

From: Satrajit Ghosh <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: nipy/nipype <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Monday, September 9, 2013 4:48 PM
To: nipy/nipype <nipype@noreply.github.commailto:nipype@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Me <loneyf@ohsu.edumailto:loneyf@ohsu.edu>
Subject: Re: [nipype] JoinNode itersource synchronize (#643)

@FredLoneyhttps://github.com/FredLoney - i'm trying to rebase/merge this with the current master and it's going to take some effort as this contains other PRs merged into this as well, which have not been merged into master. if you have a good way of cherrypicking only the joinnode/itersource components into a separate branch that will be very useful.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/643#issuecomment-24123960.

@FredLoney
Copy link
Contributor Author

I see where the extraneous commits were inadvertently merged into the tracking branch, which were rebased into the join_itersource_synchronize branch. If you'd like, I will cherry pick only the relevant commits. The extraneous commits are fairly harmless minor fixes. I planned to submit those as separate low-priority pull requests.

Fred

From: Me <loneyf@ohsu.edumailto:loneyf@ohsu.edu>
Date: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:53 AM
To: nipy/nipype <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Subject: Re: [nipype] JoinNode itersource synchronize (#643)

I rebased the branch from the Nipype master just before submission. The pull request should be from the github.com:FredLoney/nipype.git join_itersource_synchronize branch, not the master branch. Is there a way to verify that?

Fred

From: Satrajit Ghosh <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: nipy/nipype <reply@reply.github.commailto:reply@reply.github.com>
Date: Monday, September 9, 2013 4:48 PM
To: nipy/nipype <nipype@noreply.github.commailto:nipype@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Me <loneyf@ohsu.edumailto:loneyf@ohsu.edu>
Subject: Re: [nipype] JoinNode itersource synchronize (#643)

@FredLoneyhttps://github.com/FredLoney - i'm trying to rebase/merge this with the current master and it's going to take some effort as this contains other PRs merged into this as well, which have not been merged into master. if you have a good way of cherrypicking only the joinnode/itersource components into a separate branch that will be very useful.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/643#issuecomment-24123960.

@satra
Copy link
Member

satra commented Oct 9, 2013

Merged by rebase in #658

@satra satra closed this Oct 9, 2013
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants