Closed tstoeger closed 9 years ago
Welcome to dark, messy basement of CellProfiler!
Thanks for spotting this Thomas! Given these circumstances, I think it might be cleanest to either bundle these modules in the ‘other’ category or to assign each module to one of the already existing categories to avoid problems later on.
Cheers, Markus
On 08 Apr 2015, at 10:35, Thomas Stoeger notifications@github.com wrote:
While it would be nice to group "CP3D modules", I just realized that changing the category within a single module is not sufficient to create a separate category called "CP3D modules" within CellProfiler.
Having a quick look at the code of the GUI it appears that the names of the categories are hardcoded (at least in the GUI, potentially also in other parts of CellProfiler's code). - Suggesting that the core of CP would have to be changed to introduce an additional category and suggesting that those modules would not work properly in CP, which is not CPPelkmans.
Shall the CP3D modules still be grouped in a separate category and how (and by whom) would the additional category be implemented?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/pelkmanslab/CellProfilerPelkmans/issues/2.
Placed them to "Other"
While it would be nice to group "CP3D modules", I just realized that changing the category within a single module is not sufficient to create a separate category called "CP3D modules" within CellProfiler.
Having a quick look at the code of the GUI it appears that the names of the categories are hardcoded (at least in the GUI, potentially also in other parts of CellProfiler's code). - Suggesting that the core of CP would have to be changed to introduce an additional category and suggesting that those modules would not work properly in CP, which is not CPPelkmans.
Shall the CP3D modules still be grouped in a separate category and how (and by whom) would the additional category be implemented?