# 2026.04.14 Weekly Meeting

**URL:** <https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731>\
**Category:** Weekly meetings\
**Created:** [April 13, 2026, 9:12pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731 "2026-04-13T21:12:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 12\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sam\_Horvath](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/sam_horvath/32/3092_2.png) [@Sam\_Horvath](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/Sam_Horvath)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2026, 9:12pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/1 "2026-04-13T21:12:24Z")

</div>

Tomorrow, we will be having our next weekly hangout at **10:00 AM ET until 11:00 AM ET.**

Anyone is welcome to join at this link: [https://bit.ly/slicer-googlemeet-hosted-by-kitware](https://bit.ly/slicer-googlemeet-hosted-by-kitware)

* * *

> **Weekly Meeting**
>
> **Starts:** April 14, 2026, 10:00am (America/New\_York)\
> **Link:** <https://bit.ly/slicer-googlemeet-hosted-by-kitware>

**Agenda:**

Please post to this thread to put a topic on the agenda! We will try to prioritize agenda items during the meeting.

* * *

Thanks  
Sam and Ebrahim

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ebrahim](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/ebrahim/32/13403_2.png) [@ebrahim](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/ebrahim)\
**Post date:** [April 14, 2026, 4:56pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/2 "2026-04-14T16:56:39Z")

</div>

Notes from the meeting today:

## VTK regressions (Sam)

VTK pushed a very small but very breaking change in minor version (removing a transitive include of iostream), which broke a lot of extensions. We have been working through the extensions – the fix is very simple.

> [@Mac extension builds failing with cout error](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/mac-extension-builds-failing-with-cout-error/46685/14):
>
> Fix log (unchecked are in progress): SlicerDMRI SlicerRT : [Iostream missing include fixes by sjh26 · Pull Request #314 · SlicerRt/SlicerRT · GitHub](https://github.com/SlicerRt/SlicerRT/pull/314) MeshToLabelMap SlicerVMTK: Pending this vmtk fix, [Include iostream to build against VTK 9.6 by chir-set · Pull Request #481 · vmtk/vmtk · GitHub](https://github.com/vmtk/vmtk/pull/481), my branch here: [GitHub - sjh26/SlicerExtension-VMTK at fix-iostream · GitHub](https://github.com/sjh26/SlicerExtension-VMTK/tree/fix-iostream) VASSTAlgorithms: [BUG: Add missing #include \<iostream\> to C++ files using cerr/endl by sjh26 · Pull Request #5 · VASST/V…](https://github.com/VASST/VASSTAlgorithms/pull/5)

## Qt6 status

Steve rebuilt mac arm64 build and there didn’t seem to be any issues this time, except that a dialog box didn’t seem to allow discarding without saving.

## Telemetry (Ebrahim)

Service is now deployed at [slicer-telemetry.kitware.com](https://slicer-telemetry.kitware.com/).

## Work on developing a claude skill to summarize extension error (Sam)

Current output: [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BGOqYuWVIFYtjthLLXDQQ8ob5Htiu4oU/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BGOqYuWVIFYtjthLLXDQQ8ob5Htiu4oU/view?usp=sharing)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pieper](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/pieper/32/8_2.png) [@pieper](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/pieper)\
**Post date:** [April 17, 2026, 8:10pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/3 "2026-04-17T20:10:35Z")

</div>

Here’s something we can discuss at the next meeting: [Add a feature to make it easy to install extension PRs · Issue #2341 · Slicer/ExtensionsIndex · GitHub](https://github.com/Slicer/ExtensionsIndex/issues/2341)

BTW, maybe we should have a “next meeting” thread dedicated to posting agenda items for upcoming developer calls. Currently we post back to the meeting announcement, but sometimes, like this, I want to make a note in advance.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![lassoan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/lassoan/32/13_2.png) [@lassoan](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/lassoan)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2026, 3:42am UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/4 "2026-04-18T03:42:58Z")

</div>

We could relax/automate extension approval process if we had these:

- Filtering of extension by tier. This will be available very soon. @Sunderlandkyl may give an update at the next meeting. It will allow us to hide experimental (tier\<3) extensions.
- Package (and preferably also test) extensions using github actions. This way we would not need to risk running unknown scripts on the Kitware factory computer. I’ve implemented this by [generating a Slicer build tree stub](https://github.com/Slicer/Slicer/pull/9118) that is sufficient for building Python packages using the standard CMake scripts. Here is an [example that builds packages for MONAIAuto3DSeg extension](https://github.com/lassoan/SlicerMONAIAuto3DSeg/pull/105/changes).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pieper](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/pieper/32/8_2.png) [@pieper](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/pieper)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2026, 12:06pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/5 "2026-04-18T12:06:20Z")

</div>

This looks great @lassoan 👍

It’ll be great to move towards more of a community review process to help keep things moving.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![lassoan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/lassoan/32/13_2.png) [@lassoan](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/lassoan)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2026, 12:06pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/6 "2026-04-18T12:06:36Z")

</div>

> [@pieper](#):
>
> Here’s something we can discuss at the next meetin

If you describe an interesting question then it is likely that discussion will start before the meeting. Instead of hiding that discussion in a developer meeting minutes topic, it would be better to create a new topic for it. The topic would be more focused, more visible, and more people would have a chance to be involved.

We could introduce a tag “discuss-at-weekly-meeting” that we could attach to any topic to put it on the next meeting’s agenda.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![lassoan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/lassoan/32/13_2.png) [@lassoan](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/lassoan)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2026, 12:20pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/7 "2026-04-18T12:20:14Z")

</div>

> [@pieper](#):
>
> It’ll be great to move towards more of a community review process to help keep things moving.

I agree that we need to do something sustainable.

The current heavy process that is similar to app store approval process is just not sustainable without dedicated funding or developers paying the costs.

“Community review process” may not solve the problem automatically, as it suffers from the same issues as the broken scientific paper peer review process. It is now much easier to generate an extension or write a paper, but people don’t have more time to review other people’s stuff.

We could allow publishing without review and let extensions emerge by getting likes or star ratings and comments - similar to YouTube, github, etc. We could then review highly rated extensions to bring them up into a higher tier.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pieper](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/pieper/32/8_2.png) [@pieper](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/pieper)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2026, 1:37pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/8 "2026-04-18T13:37:58Z")

</div>

I’m thinking it should literally be just publish a repo and people can use it or not. Not much different than publishing a web site. By community review I mean people can try out different options and suggest the ones they like to other people. Nothing too formal.

I do think we should look seriously at sandboxing options to protect your actual computer from random code. We should discuss architectures for this.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![lassoan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/lassoan/32/13_2.png) [@lassoan](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/lassoan)\
**Post date:** [April 18, 2026, 2:40pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/9 "2026-04-18T14:40:01Z")

</div>

Yes, sandboxing would be important. Users cannot trust extensions but - more importantly - they cannot trust AI agents.

App stores provide some sandboxing but each platform is completely different and it would be significant effort on each to get into a store (and extensions and Python packages would complicate things further).

So, probably containers would be the most economical solution. If someone does not have compatible hardware or too difficult to set up then running on cloud be a good option.

Web browser is a good sandbox, too, so as SlicerTrame, VTK wasm, pyodide are improving, we’ll be able to seriously use that, too (maybe in a couple of years).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![muratmaga](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/muratmaga/32/3622_2.png) [@muratmaga](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/muratmaga)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2026, 5:50am UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/10 "2026-04-20T05:50:52Z")

</div>

> [@lassoan](#):
>
> as the broken scientific paper peer review process

The process is not broken, commercial publishers choose profit over the community service the reviewers provide. I reject every single review request from commercial publishers (unless it is a non-profit society journal published by a commerical publisher). I am sure Nature/Elsevier can afford to pay their reviewers a meaningful honorarium when they are charging $12,000 for open access fee for a single publication and raking couple billion on profits for the equivalent of providing the platform.

We do not need to do the same. I brought this up a few times before. High demand extensions can pay an annual fee for the review and support. This is fair in the sense that they are also the ones who are using the infrastructure most. The question whether there is enough extension to support to make this viable (and not prohibitively costly) and in what way we can collect this money (Kitware?) and how do we distribute to the reviewers. I don’t know the answer to that.

As for the new extensions, perhaps an AI agent can review the code for malicious injections and we simply advertise them as “use at your own risk”?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ebrahim](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/ebrahim/32/13403_2.png) [@ebrahim](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/ebrahim)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2026, 5:09pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/11 "2026-04-20T17:09:25Z")

</div>

> [@lassoan](#):
>
> If you describe an interesting question then it is likely that discussion will start before the meeting. Instead of hiding that discussion in a developer meeting minutes topic, it would be better to create a new topic for it. The topic would be more focused, more visible, and more people would have a chance to be involved.
> 
> We could introduce a tag “discuss-at-weekly-meeting” that we could attach to any topic to put it on the next meeting’s agenda.

It may also help if Sam and I post the weekly meeting announcement more in advance, so that people have the entire week to add items to the next meeting’s agenda

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ebrahim](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/ebrahim/32/13403_2.png) [@ebrahim](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/ebrahim)\
**Post date:** [April 20, 2026, 5:30pm UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-14-weekly-meeting/46731/12 "2026-04-20T17:30:47Z")

</div>

Added a summary of this discussion to the agenda: [2026.04.21 Weekly Meeting - #2 by ebrahim](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/2026-04-21-weekly-meeting/46789/2)