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
ShapeWorks 6.1 Testing #1273
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@sheryjoe I think we should assign specific testing tasks to each person. Otherwise, we'll witness diffusion of responsibility in play here. |
@HeavenlyBerserker As we did in the 6.0 release (#1073), the table in this issue should help each one to "proactively" start testing depending on the system(s) he/she has access to. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
How do we tell correctness?
Anything else we need to test for? Also, we should include instructions for what to look for in tests in the future. Otherwise, I can only make sure it runs and the results are somewhat reasonable. Edit: I added instructions to the first comment. Please let me know if we have to look for anything else. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Correctness should be typically objective and measurable, especially wrt
unit testing. But we currently have many tests deemed successful if they
simply finish without crashing.
Everyone: please file specific issues for things like this as you test.
…On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 12:45 PM Hong Xu ***@***.***> wrote:
How do we tell correctness?
- I'm assuming that for Studio, we run grooming and optimize with
default parameters and make sure the particle sampling, correspondence, and
animate are reasonable?
- For use cases, we just make sure sampling, correspondence, and
animate are reasonable, right?
Anything else we need to test for?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1273 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJT3ELIRGQ4HR6ST32BXPDTSZE4FANCNFSM46KWIFZQ>
.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@akenmorris RC12 worked for me as well |
What's left? |
I added more docs on the getting-started/shape to cover good and bad surfaces and what is shape modeling. |
@akenmorris I added the tour video and the workshop videos (partitioned into three parts) to the docs. Nothing else for my side. Other than #1354, any thing else left for the release? |
Thanks all for your great job in getting the 6.1 release out! Happy to hit the close button for this issue. |
Please edit and add a ✅ indicating success and ❌ indicating failure or 🕒 for a test in progress with your username when you complete a task for a given platform.
When a test fails, please add a github issue, add it to the 6.1 release, and link it (*the issue when it's fixed and ready to test again). Also, go ahead and add new tasks that might not already be on here.
Please use the most recent release candidate for all testing (be careful which
shapeworks
is in your$PATH
). The most recent is RC14:https://github.com/SCIInstitute/ShapeWorks/releases/tag/v6.1.0-rc14
Example:
Systems chart
Instructions for running and testing items
Testing modes:
General instructions
Notebooks
ShapeWorks/Examples/Python/notebooks/tutorials
on terminal/CMD.jupyter notebook
command.UseCases
ShapeWorks/Examples/Python/ on terminal/CMD
or on your favorite IDE that runs python.python RunUseCase.py --use_case <use_case>
command, where <use_case> is replaced by the command given. For instancepython RunUseCase.py --use_case femur
, orpython RunUseCase.py --use_case femur --groom_images
.Studio
ShapeWorks/Examples/Python/<item>
on terminal/CMD, where "" is the item you're testing.ShapeWorksStudio <item>.xlsx
.Studio: MeshGrooming
ShapeWorksStudio
, or open ShapeWorksStudio somehow.Ok, now the real thing!
* Edit deep_ssm.py so that
num_samples = 3
on line 76 and"epochs": 3,
on line 132, otherwise it will take upwards of two days.Please keep comments on this issue to a minimum. Let's try to keep the status in the table and not in the comments.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: