On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:44:25PM +0000, Mark Jenkinson wrote:
> I'm torn here, as I would also like consistency but I also do not
> want to break existing scripts (ours or others) that rely on the
> existing syntax. One way forward is to create new tools which
> wrap previous tools with new syntax. This wouldn't be too hard,
> although it would add to the already high number of names
> in $FSLDIR/bin. What do people generally think about this?
I'd prefer uniformity -- GNU style or any other. Major API changes
happened before (FSL3->4).
Michael
--
GPG key: 1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke
http://mih.voxindeserto.de
|