cbirdferrer / collatrix Goto Github PK

The input window sizes pull up as very small on my machine (Windows 10). is there any way to change the default size so that all of the input question text is displayed? See image:

Note: submitted as part of a JOSS review

Suggest adding a link to the sections of the readme with more info on the inputs if you do not want to add any more information to the dialog boxes themselves (I see your response to this issue but agree with @evaristor that more information would be helpful here). Perhaps you can link to the help box, which currently does not work?

Note: submitting as part of a JOSS review

Please include the required Python version(s) in documentation.

Note: submitted as part of a JOSS review.

The messages in the dialog boxes (titles and names of fields) are too brief. On the other hand, the description in the README (and even the comments in the code) are satisfactorily detailed. I suggest adding text boxes to the GUI with more detailed information.

• Review for the Journal of Open Source Software

There are no automated tests. I suggest using pytest-qt (or Qt Test) in conjunction with GitHub Actions or Travis. You can find more information here:

• PyQt: GUI Testing
• Test PyQt GUIs with QTest and unittest

• Review for the Journal of Open Source Software

Hello,

I have been encountering some error codes, and am unsure if it is specifically on my end. Over the coarse of my measurements, I updated the version of Morphometrix I was using to fix a bug. I am able to run collatrix for the very earliest files, and in subsequent files I receive a duplicate object error, despite there being no duplicate object in the csv file. When I try to run it with the updated Morphometrix output, it is unable to recognize them as morphometrix files. Is this problem to do with a compatibility issue given the new update or am I messing something up on my end?

The header in column 1 of the output CSV file is blank. Please add a header to the first column of the output to ensure that it is a valid CSV file.

• Review for the Journal of Open Source Software

Hi Clara,

I'm attempting to use the Whale Body Condition Function in CollatriX and running into a snag.

I got the same message screenshotted below whether I selected the csv containing the collated measurements outputted by CollatriX from the allIDs (measured in m) or PixelCount (pixels). Does it matter which of the two files we select for the first input? I'm looking to calculate a BAI in pixels.

Thank you
2022_allIDs.csv

[2022_PixelCount.csv](https://gi
2022_allIDs.csv
thub.com/cbirdferrer/collatrix/files/11951867/2022_PixelCount.csv)
2022_allIDs.csv

Good afternoon ,

I am trying to run the CollatriX Main Function (python -m collatrix) with the following input below:

yes Animal ID in folder name
no safety
no subset list

My goal is to get an output .csv file measured in pixels. However, when I finish selecting my folders (steps 4-6), I receive the following error message:
TypeError: read_csv () got an unexpected keyword argument 'prefix'

I checked the package was up to date with the line of code listed on your wiki page (pip install collatrix --upgrade)(1.0.8), but the error still comes up. I am a beginner (new) python user, and any help you could provide is appreciated.

Thank you

Please add a section in the README with guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) contribute to the software, 2) report issues or problems with the software, and 3) seek support.

• Review for the Journal of Open Source Software

Please remove the commented-out code. Lines 2 and 19 of setup.py and lines 6, 12, 16, and 17 of meta.yaml are commented out. You can find more information about why that is considered a bad idea here:

• Please, don’t commit commented-out code
• Don’t share commented-out code

• Review for the Journal of Open Source Software

Please show how to build the package. You could add a shell script, a Makefile, or a GitHub Actions (or Travis) configuration file that includes the command used to build the conda package.

• Review for the Journal of Open Source Software

Suggest adding in some short documentation on how to run the tests locally.

Note: submitted as part of a JOSS review.