[Bioperl-l] Wiki inconsistency?

Nathan S Haigh n.haigh at sheffield.ac.uk
Fri Jan 25 02:32:10 EST 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Sendu,

Have you thought about using a template for the latest stable release and the latest developer release? That way, any article/link that always needs
to point to the latest version simply has to include the correct template? So once a new release is made, you simply update the one template, and
changes automatically propagate through the wiki - might save some wiki admin each time there's a new release. You could get more intricate, and use a
template to show the latest version of any particular release series so you could do something like:

{{latest release|series=1.5.x|full=y}}
and
{{latest release|series=1.4.x|full=y}}

or even:

{{latest release|series=stable|full=y}}
and
{{latest release|series=dev|full=y}}

these templates could return 1.5.2_102 if the "full" param is set to something or simply 1.5.2 if the "full" param is missing.

Just a thought.
Nath


Sendu Bala wrote:
> Ryan Golhar wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I haven't used Bioperl in a while but recently started using it.  I
>> was using 1.4.0 but see on the website that 1.5.2 has been released.  
>> If I click on the link for 1.5.2
>> (http://www.bioperl.org/wiki/Release_1.5.2), I see a two versions:
>>
>> bioperl-1.5.2_102
>>
>> and
>>
>> bioperl-1.5.2_100
> 
> Where do you see this older version? I did a search on the page and that
> term isn't found. _100 was the first version of 1.5.2 core to go out.
> There were then 2 minor revisions released, as detailed in the 'Updates'
> section of the page.
> 
> 
>> However, If I click on the Downloads link on the left toolbar, then
>> scroll down, I see 1.5.2 Developer Release.  The tar file here points
>> to current_core_unstable.tar.gz.
> 
> Yes, that is just an alias to bioperl-1.5.2_102, ie. whatever the latest
> version happens to be. So that people don't need to worry about the
> actual version, they can just have one static bookmark.
> 
> 
>> Is this supposed to be this way?  It seems a bit confusing.  I think
>> it might be appropriate to put all the download links in one
>> location...just my two cents...
> 
> Well the primary page where all the links are found is the Downloads
> page. The Release_1.5.2 page is specific to 1.5.2 and will remain for
> historic reasons (so at some point there will be 1.5.3 or something and
> the appropriate links on the main Downloads page will be updated to
> that, but if someone specifically wants 1.5.2 they can still find the
> 1.5.2 downloads on its own dedicated page).
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHmZB69gTv6QYzVL4RAnRpAJwOyWjZXzD0UJBNFNP8H1Hrn4c66ACfRyzA
NsJEZydsG+aMzNltrBw+Nx4=
=kHt0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list