[Biopython] Planning Biopython 1.72

[Michiel de Hoon]

 > That has made be realise that the new pairwise alignment
code being in Bio.Align at top level means it gets imported
as a side effect all over the place. With hindsight, it would
have been better as a sub-module to avoid this overhead.
What are people's thoughts here?

Hi Peter,Can you show an example where this happens? I guess usually people would use "from Bio import Align"; then it doesn't really matter.
Best,-Michiel

    On Saturday, June 23, 2018, 3:31:53 AM GMT+9, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:  
 
 On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> The first hurdle is with the wheel building, it looks like I need
>> to debug this cryptic error:
>>
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>  File "<string>", line 1, in <module>
>> AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'version'
>>
>> https://travis-ci.org/biopython/biopython-wheels/builds/395521793
>
> That seems easy to avoid, ...

Windows Wheels seem to have built, but not uploaded due to an
SSL issue, logged here:

https://github.com/matthew-brett/multibuild/issues/178

Meanwhile on Linux and Mac, something seems to be breaking
with testing the compiled code.

That has made be realise that the new pairwise alignment
code being in Bio.Align at top level means it gets imported
as a side effect all over the place. With hindsight, it would
have been better as a sub-module to avoid this overhead.
What are people's thoughts here?

Peter
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython/attachments/20180623/03a67fd5/attachment-0002.html>