[Biopython-dev] New Homepage - "Brute force" effort of Community?

[Markus Piotrowski]

Should we start?
OK, I had hoped that we could agree on a checklist, nevertheless I have 
the feeling that the "brute force" effort has at least some supporters. 
One additional advantage to work "page-wise" will be that we don't spend 
time on things that others are already addressing.
Although Tiago and Lenna are willing to do 20 pages, I suggest to start 
with 10 pages and look if there are some issues that need 
feedback/coordination/etc. If everything is fine we just do another 10.
@Tiago:  From "65-bit_Windows_Biopython.md" to "Biopython_md"
@Lenna: From "Building_a_release.md" to "Coordinate_mapping.md"
@me: From "Create_an_Article_to_this_category.md" to "GSOC2010_Joao.md"

@Vincent: ready/willing to join in this approach?
@Peter:  OK?

Should we move to github.com/biopython/biopython.github.io/issues for 
discussion?

-Markus

Am 19.04.2016 um 14:25 schrieb Markus Piotrowski:
> Here is draft of a checklist, open for discussion:
>
> Checklist:
> 1. Title
> - The title in the markdown file may be changed into something more 
> user friendly 
> (https://github.com/biopython/biopython.github.io/issues/22)
> - Take care that the title is not repeated in the main text (like 
> here: http://biopython.org/wiki/Documentation)
>
> 2. Is the text up-to-date? (Python versions etc)
>
> 3. Formatting
> - Suggestion: Python/Biopython commands, keywords, module/function 
> names should be formatted as inline-code with single backticks, e.g. 
> `Bio.SeqIO`           ??? Or bold???
> - If applicable, they can also serve as links to the respective Wiki page
> - Code output and command-line examples should be formatted as block 
> code with three backticks instead of several single line inline-code 
> statements.
> - Check block code for trailing white spaces, which may result in the 
> addition of an (unnecessary) horizontal scrollbars as here: 
> http://biopython.org/wiki/ACE_contig_to_alignment.
>
> 4. Code
> - Code should be checked for a minimum of PEP8 compliance.
> - The code should work (as it is) under Biopython 1.66
> - Since we are recommending Python 3.5 as environment, the code should 
> work under Python 3.5      ???
>
> 5. Links
> - Check all links
> - 'Repair' broken links
> Try to find a link that's more likely to be stable. E.g. for papers I 
> think that dx.doi.org references (or Pubmed references) are more 
> stable than linking to a special page of the respective journal or 
> private or institutional homepages. With 
> http://www.crossref.org/SimpleTextQuery/ you can do a reverse doi 
> lookup for a given paper.
> - Links with anchors (.../some_page#jump_here) may have issues with 
> upper/lowercase formatting 
> (https://github.com/biopython/biopython.github.io/issues/13)
> - Are the links up-to-date? E.g. in 
> http://biopython.org/wiki/Getting_Started the Python Quick Reference 
> links to Python 2.5
>
> 6. References
> - Some pages used a PubMed plugin under MediaWiki to display 
> references 
> (https://github.com/biopython/biopython.github.io/issues/12). Since 
> it's unlikely (?) to have a functional replacement, I would suggest to 
> convert them to simple links.
>
> 7. RSS feeds
> - As above, embedding an existing RSS feed seems hard 
> (https://github.com/biopython/biopython.github.io/issues/4), again I 
> would suggest replace with a link pointing to the RSS feed
>
> -Markus
>
>
> Am 17.04.2016 um 13:40 schrieb Markus Piotrowski:
>> Dear Biopythoneers,
>>
>> It's great that the Biopython project has a working homepage again. 
>> Great job, Peter!
>> There is still much to do, many things (especially links) are broken 
>> due to the moving, however some things were broken before or 
>> outdated. And most of these issues must be addressed manually.
>> I want to suggest a "brute force" effort of the community to get most 
>> of the issues repaired quickly and have a fairly up-to-date homepage:
>> Actually there are approx. 120 markdown files in the wiki folder. If 
>> we find 10 - 12 people willing to participate then we could assign 10 
>> files to each person (e.g. file 1 - 10, from "64-bit_Windows...md" 
>> to  "Biopython.md", etc.). Each person then checks his pages 
>> completely for all issues (title, content, up-to-dateness, links, 
>> formatting, functionality of example code, Python 2/3, etc). We could 
>> design a checklist with suggested solutions to aid in this process.
>> I think that this "per page" effort is more effective than to tackle 
>> the things "per issue". Also, having someone looking at a page who 
>> hasn't written it, may be advantageous in finding problems.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> -Markus
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Biopython-dev mailing list
>> Biopython-dev at mailman.open-bio.org
>> http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython-dev
>