[Bioperl-l] Priorities for a bioperl-1.6 release

Brian Osborne bosborne11 at verizon.net
Wed Feb 13 18:32:46 UTC 2008


You should be careful about the names of these packages. For example,  
Bio::Biblio and Bio::Restriction are not "in development" as the term  
bioperl-dev implies. They're tried and true. And there may be sets of  
modules that are experimental in "bioperl-dev", of course. Is it  
possible to have 2 packages, "dev" and "tools"? Or something along  
those lines?

Calling things by the wrong names leads to confusion, witness the  
Bioperl newcomers who would install an antiquated version 1.4 because  
it was labelled 'stable'.


On Feb 13, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Chris Fields wrote:

> I've added/modified the page as well; moved Bio::FeatureIO and  
> Bio::SeqFeature::Annotated over to the bioperl-dev for now, along  
> with Bio::Assembly and Bio::Restriction.  We'll have to test out  
> removing those modules to see what blows up.

More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list