Verify if it is a code or a teaching problem
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
All Stories
Oct 13 2022
We think that people in the real world do not use the smoothing options at all and checking for their impact revealed that they seem to have no effect at all in most cases. We decided to remove the options from the preferences. In addition, there's a message in the terminal when no smoothed mesh could be created which is the case for some single-slice segmentations. It even suggests to try again without smoothing. However, this should probably be a more prominent feedback as message box for example.
We should double-check if there's really a bug as there's a good chance that it was just misunderstood how it works. Everything that's not covered by the level window is supposed to be transparent. We should probably improve the checklist to be more clear.
Please double check, if there is realy an error with Jet Transparent (or with the checklist). And on which systems.
solution would be to add a margin to the selection dialog.
Oct 12 2022
In T29338#242673, @kislinsk wrote:It's already an optional feature. You can choose if you want to add your suggestion to the standard suggestions or if you only want your custom suggestions in the preferences. When specified via command-line, the custom suggestions will be the only ones by default.
In T29338#242672, @floca wrote:One question. The current implementation has always standard suggestions and the custom suggestions are added. I am wondering it wouldn't be better if in case of custom suggestions are given, only the custom suggestions appear.
E.g. with the current logic we would be able to allow people define a study that only contain special custom suggestions and not the standard ones, would we?
One question. The current implementation has always standard suggestions and the custom suggestions are added. I am wondering it wouldn't be better if in case of custom suggestions are given, only the custom suggestions appear.
E.g. with the current logic we would be able to allow people define a study that only contain special custom suggestions and not the standard ones, would we?
Pushed new branch to rMITK MITK: bugfix/T29338-RenameLabelWindowImprovements.
Oct 11 2022
Deleted branch from rMITK MITK: bugfix/T29332-QtWebEngineIssuesOnLinux.
Pushed new branch to rMITK MITK: bugfix/T29332-QtWebEngineIssuesOnLinux.
Oct 10 2022
There is already a shortcut for renaming: Ctrl+L, R but I found this too inconvenient and always ended up doing right click -> Rename instead.
The last part with the high physical memory however *is* an issue. I reopen and rename this task.
This is as expected, since we are not an officially proven developer by Apple.
We may even be able to do it in code, according to the Qt documentation: QTWEBENGINE_CHROMIUM_FLAGS can also be set using {qputenv} from within the application if called before QtWebEngineQuick::initialize().
QTWEBENGINE_DISABLE_SANDBOX=1 is equal to QTWEBENGINE_CHROMIUM_FLAGS="--no-sandbox". While trying to debug the issue, I noticed that the following workaround to have the WebEngine renderer and plugins in the same process as the browser works as well: QTWEBENGINE_CHROMIUM_FLAGS="--single-process". It is and sounds less scary compared to disabling the sandbox. As a fix, we could change our start shell scripts on Linux to set the environment variable for the call of the application.
Regarding point 3: Currently the doule click (should) allow to jump to the centroid of the label. So it has a purpose. Don't know what makes more sense UX wise. May be a keyboard short cut for renaming may also be sufficient?
Deleted branch from rMITK MITK: bugfix/T29339-F1ContextHelpViewNavigator.
Pushed new branch to rMITK MITK: bugfix/T29339-F1ContextHelpViewNavigator.
Oct 8 2022
Deleted branch from rMITK MITK: bugfix/T29334-ImproveSurfaceVtkWriterTest.