[Bioperl-l] Polloc: Naming question

[Chris Fields]

Agreed with Rob on: Bio::Polloc (and the genericity of the Bio::* namespace).  Planning on submitting it to CPAN?

chris

On May 31, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Luis-Miguel Rodríguez Rojas wrote:

> Hello Rob,
> 
> Thanks.  I think it's much better to ask the most experienced before these
> things.  On the other hand, I feel much better having a blessing from
> bioperl (even if it's not strictly necessary) ;)
> 
> 
> --
> Luis M. Rodriguez-R
> [ http://thebio.me/lrr ]
> ---------------------------------
> UMR Résistance des Plantes aux Bioagresseurs - Group effecteur/cible
> Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Montpellier, France
> [ http://bioinfo-prod.mpl.ird.fr/xantho | Luismiguel.Rodriguez at ird.fr ]
> +33 (0) 6.29.74.55.93
> 
> Unidad de Bioinformática del Laboratorio de Micología y Fitopatología
> Universidad de Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
> [ http://lamfu.uniandes.edu.co | luisrodr at uniandes.edu.co ]
> +57 (1) 3.39.49.49 ext 2777
> 
> 
> 
> 2011/5/31 Robert Buels <rmb32 at cornell.edu>
> 
>> Hi Luis,
>> 
>> Yes, I think either Bio::Polloc or Bio::Typing::Polloc would be fine.
>> 
>> BioPerl doesn't have exclusive rights to the Bio::* namespace.  :-)
>> 
>> Rob
>> 
>> 
>> On 05/31/2011 09:20 AM, Luis-Miguel Rodríguez Rojas wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> I am currently working in a Perl library aimed to simplify the development
>>> of applications in Molecular Typing.  It's basically a library to handle
>>> polymorphic loci (identify, group and predict typing results).  I think
>>> it's
>>> not generic enough to be part of bioperl (and doesn't follow the
>>> directives
>>> of bioperl) despite it largely uses the bioperl libraries.  However, I
>>> would
>>> be glad to hear some comments about the namespace it should take from the
>>> bioperl community.
>>> 
>>> I already developed a script using this library, and it's certainly
>>> useful,
>>> so I would like to make it available from CPAN.  It's currently called
>>> Polloc (for *Pol*ymorphic *loc*i), but a top-level name is probably a bad
>>> 
>>> idea.  Would it be ok if I use a Bio::* namespace?  I was thinking in
>>> Bio::PolLoc or Bio::Typing::Polloc.  I would like to preserve the 'Polloc'
>>> name, because I feel a more generic one would give the wrong idea about
>>> how
>>> generic it is.  For example, I would expect Bio::Polymorphism or
>>> Bio::MolecularTyping to be far more abstract than my library (which is
>>> aimed
>>> to the usage of specific tools, and the analysis of specific loci).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> LRR.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Luis M. Rodriguez-R
>>> [ http://thebio.me/lrr ]
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> UMR Résistance des Plantes aux Bioagresseurs - Group effecteur/cible
>>> Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Montpellier, France
>>> [ http://bioinfo-prod.mpl.ird.fr/xantho | Luismiguel.Rodriguez at ird.fr ]
>>> +33 (0) 6.29.74.55.93
>>> 
>>> Unidad de Bioinformática del Laboratorio de Micología y Fitopatología
>>> Universidad de Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
>>> [ http://lamfu.uniandes.edu.co | luisrodr at uniandes.edu.co ]
>>> +57 (1) 3.39.49.49 ext 2777
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bioperl-l mailing list
>>> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
>>> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l