[Bioperl-l] RE: Bio::FeatureHolderI interface confusion

[Nathan (Nat) Goodman]

Hi Ewan

> Anyway - this is a convention that we should agree on. My proposal is
> to strip bioperl of the developer style interfaces, and strengthen
> the client style interfaces.

Sounds like a good plan.  I would add one other desideratum: reduce the
number of client interfaces by consolidating aggressively.  I think this was
one of Chris’s points, too.

What do you think of having a CPAN-like repository?  It would take a lot of
pressure off the core developers and core architecture by making it possible
for people to contribute code without worrying about the long term impact.
This would really help with the goal of keeping the core system compact and
easily approachable.

>    ---> other contracts are documented as a series of methods which
> can be swapped in or out by other modules wanting to fulfill this role,
> without having a formal I file.

An historical note: Smalltalk calls these ‘protocols’.  This style is
immensely successful in the Smalltalk world.

Best,
Nat