[Bioperl-l] bioperl reorganization
Mark A. Jensen
maj at fortinbras.us
Thu Jul 23 14:16:07 UTC 2009
Open the pod bay doors, BioPerl.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Hannah" <jay at jays.net>
To: <bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Bioperl-l] bioperl reorganization
> On Jul 17, 2009, at 10:26 PM, Chris Fields wrote:
>>> If Bio::Foo::Bar is abandoned by all distributions, a new copy of
>>> that dist is flagged DEPRECATED ("in favor of Bio::Fooer::Bar"),
>>> and pushed to CPAN. That clues everyone in that development has
>>> stopped and where they should go instead. For example:
>> Okay, but seems kinda crufty. I do think there is some talk of
>> removing such modules from the active CPAN, as they would always be
>> available as part of BackPAN, but I haven't seen movement along
>> those lines.
> DEPRECATED modules can be removed from PAUSE after 6 months or 1 year
> or 50 years or whatever. Better to have it explicitly flagged and
> sitting out there than not flagged, misleading new users seeking
> solutions on CPAN. Eventually completely gone.
>> Yes, I have to say it has been very nice with Moose, though I wish
>> MooseX::Declare and MooseX::Method::Signatures would move out of
>> alpha (probably will happen around the first stable release of perl6).
> Indeed. A current CPAN is no magic bullet for every development
> dilemma. It's just better than a stagnant one. :)
> There's still plenty of tactical argument and jockeying in Catalyst
> and Moose. Like any healthy and active open source project populated
> by energetic people.
> On Jul 17, 2009, at 10:31 PM, Chris Fields wrote:
>> I think both of you made very good arguments. Will have to
>> nickname you guys the IRC Mob.
> Oooo... I like it! I'll sketch up some tattoo designs. :)
> On Jul 18, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Mark A. Jensen wrote:
> Wow. That's awesome. :)
>> My guess is that the NumDependencies values (which move fastest in
>> the Degree sum and create the sawtooth pattern) reflect
>> dependencies among the modules within the clusters. Wouldn't that
>> be cool? I don't think this works, but the data could certainly be
>> cajoled into giving us this.
> Can the data be cajoled into proving that we've already split up
> BioPerl, so we can avoid all that SVN drudgery? :)
> BioPerl became self aware on August 17, 2009.
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
More information about the Bioperl-l