What is the current stable version?

[guoquan]

Hi,

I am looking for the correct version to work with. Reading the docs I understand that it is featuring v2 (react) and v1(meteor) is out of support.

But I find in release, tags, on npm, docker hub, and the latest is v4.9.21! I even found v5.0.0-v2 in tags which I believe is a draft version.

Also, I never find any hint about v4/v5 in any docs. I also look at some random branches to find updates in the docs and, OOH you say you have V3 on a v2 tmp branch?! Cheering, but where is V3?

Now I got confused about v1/v2 and v3/v4/v5. Most of the recent commits and docs are aiming v2 while there are v3/v4/v5. I might miss the component described by the version numbers. Maybe v2 for core and v4.9 for viewer app. Please correct me if that is the case.

And, if I clone from the master branch, what is the version I got?

Thanks!

[swederik]

Yes we are pretty dysfunctional when it comes to versioning to be honest.

In general:

• v1: Meteor
• v2: React version which can currently be found on the master branch
• v3: Redesigned React-based version which can currently be found on feat/v2-main (when the branch was created there was some internal discussion about whether or not we would make this v2 or v3, and we haven't renamed the branch yet). To be released soon.

All the other version numbers are a bit weird. The problem is that we started using semantic-versioning plugins to automatically update package versions when things got merged, and the main viewer itself had some inadvertent "breaking" changes which bumped it up to some higher version number. Going forward, we are going to try to be better about using package numbering for developer-consumable packages and intentional product versioning for the viewer itself.

So to answer your question, the current released version is "@ohif/viewer@4.9.21", but in the "product" numbering scheme I describe, it's what we are calling v2....

I realize that's a messy answer, but I hope it clarifies things a bit. I'm open to suggestions for how to fix things. Automated semantic versioning has its benefits, but it is really making things confusing for the viewer numbering.

[PoyangLiu]

@swederik, thank you for the explanation. I've been seeing a lot of documentation update on v3 (feat/v2-main) recently. Are there any about the difference between v2 to v3 and the migration path?

[swederik]

Not a ton yet, but it's coming soon and it's one of our top priorities. The v3 stuff is being published to https://ohif-platform-docs.netlify.app/next/ and https://ohif-platform-viewer.netlify.app/ at the moment. It still misses some features that v2 has (notably, MPR and DICOM Seg), but that's because we have other plans for those.

[guoquan]

@swederik Thanks for the explanation. Totally understand the difficulty when it comes to versioning.

What about the planned upgrading to v3? Found the gap analysis and there are some features we really missed, especially the 3D things (VTK and MIP/MPR layout). Is it soon, or something promising, but should be expected after a year? I don't mean urging, 😃 just spying on OHIF's plan and that should help my decision.

[danihodovic]

Is https://github.com/OHIF/Viewers/tree/v3/storybook yet another branch / version that's actively worked on? Is there any timeline for consolidating the different versions?

[swederik]

@swederik Thanks for the explanation. Totally understand the difficulty when it comes to versioning.

What about the planned upgrading to v3? Found the gap analysis and there are some features we really missed, especially the 3D things (VTK and MIP/MPR layout). Is it soon, or something promising, but should be expected after a year? I don't mean urging, 😃 just spying on OHIF's plan and that should help my decision.

Yes there is an upcoming replacement for the current approach to 3D support (via https://github.com/OHIF/react-vtkjs-viewport) that should make everything 3D a lot easier for the future. We plan to integrate it into OHIF v3 soon.

Is https://github.com/OHIF/Viewers/tree/v3/storybook yet another branch / version that's actively worked on? Is there any timeline for consolidating the different versions?

We are planning to stop embedding UI components inside the new docusaurus site because some of the styles break, and instead to just host a Storybook (https://storybook.js.org/) site for the UI components instead. That branch is just a testbed for that.

[shivasuri]

Is there any plan to update the base styling of v3? imo v2 looks a bit more professional/cleaner stylistically (colors and edges) than v3. Although I understand that TailwindCSS provides more customizability on the design to those who extend OHIF.

It also seems like there are a few features v2 has over v3 such as the series information overlays on images as well as multiple tools. Were some of these intentionally left behind, and what is the timeline/plan to supply the toolbar? Is there a public doc or kanban somewhere describing the process of closing all the gaps? Thanks!

[swederik]

series information overlays on images

This information is usually displayed in DICOM viewers but I think it's not strictly necessary. From our discussions with users, it seems that most of the time they are just ignoring this information and it's just visual clutter. Some other imaging applications have also removed / reduced the amount of information in the panels at any given time (https://arterys.com/ as an example), so I don't think this is really an issue. If you want to have it for your application, you can copy the overlay component into a new extension and replace the viewport. There is series information if you click on the patient icon in the top right of the viewports, and relevant information shows up (e.g. index in stack, current W/L, zoom %) when you scroll / window / zoom.

to supply the toolbar

I'm not sure I understand this question? Which toolbar? (Maybe a screenshot would help)

update the base styling of v3?

We will be evolving it as we move forward, but we won't be changing it back to look like v2. If you prefer how v2 looks, you can probably adapt the CSS or set some tailwind variables to make it closer to that style, but that's not on our roadmap. If you have specific issues with it, or think some aspects need polishing / cleanup we'd be happy to hear about them though.

I think we will make a public Github Project soon with a set of issues for achieving feature parity between v3 and v2. We need that so we know when we think it's okay to replace the master branch with v3. We don't want to do that now because some people will lose features they may be using now (e.g. DICOM Seg, RT Struct).

[danihodovic]

Could you release feat/v2-main versions to npm? Currently we're building and re-publishing feat/v2-main under our own organization, but in order to stay in sync with the upstream it would be preferable if we could install it from the source project.

[anujramsoft]

@swederik Thanks for the explanation. Totally understand the difficulty when it comes to versioning. What about the planned upgrading to v3? Found the gap analysis and there are some features we really missed, especially the 3D things (VTK and MIP/MPR layout). Is it soon, or something promising, but should be expected after a year? I don't mean urging, 😃 just spying on OHIF's plan and that should help my decision.

Yes there is an upcoming replacement for the current approach to 3D support (via https://github.com/OHIF/react-vtkjs-viewport) that should make everything 3D a lot easier for the future. We plan to integrate it into OHIF v3 soon.

Is https://github.com/OHIF/Viewers/tree/v3/storybook yet another branch / version that's actively worked on? Is there any timeline for consolidating the different versions?

We are planning to stop embedding UI components inside the new docusaurus site because some of the styles break, and instead to just host a Storybook (https://storybook.js.org/) site for the UI components instead. That branch is just a testbed for that.

Do we have any timeline for integration of 3D?

[Georift]

Hey @swederik thanks for the summary on the current state of the project. Would you accept a PR adding some of these details to the main README?

I'll look to raise a PR soon, has anything changed since your comment? Looks like the v3 branch is now v3-stable?

[mbilalsh]

I need v1. or any possible way to connect the legacy pacs system that donot support DicomWeb with latest ohif v3-stable

[ahlaughland]

Congratulations on the release of master 3.7.0-beta.61!

It looks like the master 3.7.0-beta.61 does not include the code from v3-stable?

Will the v3-stable branch be merged in to master? And if so when?

[sedghi]

Try viewer-dev.ohif.org instead of viewer.ohif.org Our viewer.ohif.org is deployed from release branch while viewer-dev.ohif.org is our master branch Read more about branch explanations here https://docs.ohif.org/development/getting-started#developing