I wanted to get a sense of community demand for/reliance on python-bioformats; I think there has been a disconnect in how we on our team have thought about it for the last few years (which is as one “support beam” making CellProfiler work for users with proprietary formats) and how some other folks in the community have wished it was (a broadly, enthusiastically supported package for the whole community). I feel like those who want more from it have ended up frustrated, so first of all I just wanted to apologize personally for that. We’ve tried to at least now make our current stance more clear in our documentation. If I miss a post about it on here, please don’t hesitate to tag me in; I’m still getting up to speed with a lot of its functionality, so I can’t promise I’ll always be able to solve stuff right away, but we definitely want to have fewer frustrated folks in the community.
Second of all, I would love to get a sense of how broadly it is still being used; we’re slowly modifying CellProfiler’s java dependencies in collaboration with the ImageJ folks such that we’re starting to imagine a world without CellProfiler needing python-bioformats (this world would be, at minimum, several months off, but perhaps not several years off), but we don’t have a good sense on what us abandoning that project entirely would do. Obviously, in a perfect world, every useful-to-a-single-person tool would be supported indefinitely, but if we need to make decisions about prioritization of resources, it would be helpful to know basically who else is using it. Is it the case that now everyone uses pyimagej so most folks don’t really care, is there a die-hard core of users who love it (and we could maybe lean on for some assistance with keeping it up to date), are we somewhere in the middle, etc. I want to emphasize that nothing is changing right now, but we do want to start thinking about plans for the future.
Open to the floor here!