[Bioperl-l] 1.0.2

[Hilmar Lapp]

I'd not be so optimistic at this point. I'm afraid putting bioperl-db and biosql to more use may instigate API changes at some places. It shouldn't be terrible though. Anyway, I'm just not sure yet we should close 1.0.x after 1.0.2.

I'm testing the Location::each_Location fix and commit in a second. Jason, do you have time to merge that to the branch (I'd have to download the entire branch; let me know), or is each_Location not in the branch anyway? If the latter is true, that means that bioperl-db is now incompatible with the 1.0.x branch. Hm. Should we branch bioperl-db then, too? Would be kind of difficult by now and involve some back-porting ...

Opinions?

	-hilmar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Stajich [mailto:jason@cgt.mc.duke.edu]
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 1:44 PM
> To: Bioperl
> Subject: [Bioperl-l] 1.0.2
> 
> 
> Okay folks, I'm going to prepare 1.0.2 release of the core 
> this weekend
> and announce on Monday.
> 
> Unless there is a really good reason, I'd like to close the 
> branch after
> this release and have development only on the main trunk.  1.0 and 1.2
> shouldn't be as incompatible as the 0.7 and 1.0 changes so 
> hopefully it
> will be easy enough for systems to upgrade the toolkit 
> without any changes
> to their code.
> 
> If the bioperl pipeline and db teams want to report in, we 
> probably need
> to look at where you are and if a 1.1 release in the next 
> week or two is
> going to still work.  I do NOT think we will need to do separate 1.0.x
> branch and 1.2 branch releases for the pipeline/db/run pkgs if the API
> stays as stable as it has been.
> 
> 
> -jason
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l@bioperl.org
> http://bioperl.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
>