Skip to content
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

Require nibabel >= 5.3.1 (fixes issues with enhanced DICOMs), and drop Python 3.8 support #800

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 25, 2025

Conversation

bpinsard
Copy link
Contributor

to avoid a bunch of enhanced dicoms issues, notably through dcmstack.
eg.

dcmstack.dcmmeta.InvalidExtensionError: The extension is not valid: Missing required base classification time

should be fixed.

@bpinsard bpinsard requested a review from yarikoptic October 31, 2024 14:47
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 31, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.48%. Comparing base (2eb5291) to head (a3d69d8).
Report is 18 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #800   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.48%   82.48%           
=======================================
  Files          42       42           
  Lines        4323     4323           
=======================================
  Hits         3566     3566           
  Misses        757      757           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@bpinsard
Copy link
Contributor Author

looks like nibabel drop 3.8 support, should heudiconv do the same? @yarikoptic

@yarikoptic
Copy link
Member

looks like nibabel drop 3.8 support, should heudiconv do the same? @yarikoptic

I guess we could.

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
"dcmstack>=0.8",
"etelemetry",
"filelock>=3.0.12",
"nibabel",
"nibabel>=5.3.1",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remind me -- why we did not have that issue before? if that is just a buggy singular nibabel version - we better just exclude that one

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Forgot to note the version that was causing this issue before upgrading, but has been there for a while #455 (comment) and my environment wasn't that old. Also we had nipy/nibabel#1378 recently merge that solved failing tests.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

well, this is a fresh version released not even a month ago. Some distributions might not have it yet, and would cause troubles. I would just keep in mind that a recent nibabel is needed for processing enhanced dicoms?

May be even get some "catch all" handler that if exception happens and nibabel is below this version -- recommend upgrading?

@yarikoptic yarikoptic changed the title [FIX] pin nibabel version Require nibabel >= 5.3.1 (fixes issues with DICOMs), and drop Python 3.8 support Mar 25, 2025
@yarikoptic yarikoptic changed the title Require nibabel >= 5.3.1 (fixes issues with DICOMs), and drop Python 3.8 support Require nibabel >= 5.3.1 (fixes issues with enhanced DICOMs), and drop Python 3.8 support Mar 25, 2025
@yarikoptic yarikoptic added internal Changes only affect the internal API patch Increment the patch version when merged and removed internal Changes only affect the internal API labels Mar 25, 2025
@yarikoptic yarikoptic merged commit 87e1b1e into nipy:master Mar 25, 2025
9 checks passed
Copy link

🚀 PR was released in v1.3.3 🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
patch Increment the patch version when merged released
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants