[Bioperl-l] extra rel. 1.6 suggestion
cjfields at uiuc.edu
Thu Aug 23 14:14:51 UTC 2007
Some interesting points by Sendu:
which I agree with completely.
Maybe the best way out if this is a variation on something that was
suggested before, which was 'splitting' the code into groups. What
if we set up a way to automatically gauge test coverage,
documentation, etc.? If I remember correctly Nathan had something
running at one point which did this.
If so, we could determine which code is potentially 'non-compliant'
and needs to be fixed (tests added, docs brought up to spec, so on),
and thus prioritize at the minimum what needs to be done for a 1.6
release. If it's deemed not worth worrying about (no active
development, author is out of contact, we have more important
priorities) we split that code off into a separate 'dev' package.
That would save some of the headache of trying to split maintenance
of ~1000 modules up on only a few devs.
More information about the Bioperl-l