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

[Steve Chervitz]

On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 05:51 US/Pacific, Nathan ((Nat)) Goodman 
wrote:

> Hi Folks
>
> There seems to be an emerging consensus on two points:
>
> 1) It would be good to recast the debate in a balanced technical form. 
>  The
> exact form is yet to be determined.  One possibility would be to think 
> of
> this as a technical evaluation of BioPerl – the good, the bad, and the 
> ugly.
> I’d recommend starting with the good, since even the most critical 
> users are
> _users_ -- we use BioPerl because it has so much good stuff.

I'm all for this. The Bioperl wiki might be a good way to collaborate 
on this effort.

BTW, the WikiDocs link on bioperl.org is throwing a 404 error. The 
biojava wiki seems to be working. Hmm. Server migration stuff probably.

> 2) It would be useful to set up a BioPerl CPAN, or at least to do some
> initial design work for this.
>
> Hilmar suggested that I take the lead and lay out the principles along 
> which
> to populate BioPAN, and I’m happy to do so.
>
> Would someone else be willing to take the lead on the technical 
> evaluation?
> I nominate Steve Chervitz, since he brings the benefit of historical
> perspective to this undertaking.

I'd be very happy to help out here, but it might make sense to have a 
few co-leaders, since Bioperl is so big and hairy. Perhaps one person 
could lead the technical code review, another for user-centric review 
(docs, demo scripts, website, tutorial)?

Steve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 1713 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://portal.open-bio.org/pipermail/bioperl-l/attachments/20030620/4fbb0c75/attachment.bin