On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Stuart Mumford <stuart@mumford.me.uk>wrote:
Hi Ralf,
I realise the license is pants! We are making efforts to contact the author and persuade him to change it! ;)
The original author can't do this, you also need at least permission from Torrence/Compo as well as from these guys: http://noc.ac.uk/using-science/crosswavelet-wavelet-coherence. And maybe also from A. Brazhe; can't check because the link to his site is dead. So the odds you can get the license changed seem on the low side.
Found the Brazhe code, it's (now?) GPL licensed: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/swan Ralf
The reason we are looking at this is it has all the features my friend
needed, so it seemed easier (at least from a getting work done perspective) to start with this code, which also happened to be a (far to direct) implementation of the IDL code he was having to use before.
While it would be nice to build some or all of this into a bigger package, at the end of the day just having a decent Python implementation of the C. Torrence and G. P. Compo wavelet code will be yet another thing people don't need IDL for.
I just checked the Matlab code from http://paos.colorado.edu/research/wavelets/ (I don't speak IDL) and it's not a lot of code nor is it very complicated. What I would suggest is to contact Torrence and Compo directly to see if they're willing to change to a BSD license, and otherwise just reimplement the algorithm based on their paper.
Stuart
P.S. I am a solar physicist and IDL is everywhere *shudders*
:)
Cheers, Ralf
On 4 October 2013 11:41, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Stuart Mumford <stuart@mumford.me.uk>wrote:
Hello,
On the topic of wavelet's I am involved in a very small scale effort to tidy up this continuous wavelet package, with (if we can contact the original author) the eventual aim of making it useful and potentially a part of some larger package (scipy?).
Hi Stuart, that code has a license that's incompatible with both BSD and GPL licenses so it's pretty much useless. The amount of code there is not much more than what's already in scipy.signal.wavelets, so improving the scipy cwt code would probably be a better idea.
Ralf
Stuart
On 4 October 2013 09:15, François Boulogne <fboulogne@sciunto.org>wrote:
Dear skimagers,
With Ralf, we initiated a "friendly" fork of pywavelet for a future inclusion in scipy and David joined us in this work. We improved the doc, removed old-fashioned codes and we are trying now to add tests. We started this because I was considering this ticket: https://github.com/scikit-image/scikit-image/issues/602 Indeed, I believe wavelets may be useful for scikit-image. Instead of requiring a new dependency, I thought it is much more valuable to integrate the code in scipy and this is now in the workplan for scipy1.0.
If some of you used pywavelet before, we would be grateful to you if you can check your code against the fork. It must be fully compatible with pywavelets.
Thanks! Cheers. François.
-------- Message original -------- Sujet: large PyWavelets update, please test Date : Tue, 1 Oct 2013 17:56:36 +0200 De : Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> Pour : pywavelets@googlegroups.com Copie à : François Boulogne <fboulogne@sciunto.org>, david.menendez.hurtado@scilifelab.se
Hi all,
https://github.com/nigma/pywt/pull/7 contains a large refactoring of PyWavelets, with contributions from Francois Boulogne, David Menendez Hurtado and myself. Main feature is support for Python 3 (single code base). Other changes are:
- Numpy style docstrings for all public functions - A unit test suite with reasonable coverage (see https://coveralls.io/r/rgommers/pywt) - PEP8 and Numpy C code standard compliance - Changes to source tree layout, build setup, Numpy interfaces and C and Cython templating to more standard styles.
This set of changes is supposed to be fully backwards compatible. They were quite invasive though (~150 commits), so there's a decent chance that some things not covered by the test suite were broken in the process. To catch those now, it would be very helpful if people could test their own code against either use the PR or the master branch of https://github.com/rgommers/pywt.
While we've kept full backwards compatibility so far, we've also compiled a list of things that could be improved in the current API: https://github.com/rgommers/pywt/issues/38. Please add suggestions there if you have them.
Cheers, Ralf
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scikit-image" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scikit-image+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scikit-image" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scikit-image+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scikit-image" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scikit-image+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scikit-image" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scikit-image+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.