[Bioperl-l] bioperl reorganization
cjfields at illinois.edu
Fri Jul 17 23:31:33 EDT 2009
On Jul 17, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Robert Buels wrote:
> I was going to write a longer post, but Jay wrote everything I was
> going to write, plus more, and did a better job.
I think both of you made very good arguments. Will have to nickname
you guys the IRC Mob.
> If there were not so many person-years of development time already
> in BioPerl, I would probably be pushing for ground-up rewrite to
> simplify things. But as chromatic frequently says (he's fantastic,
> look him up), ground-up rewrites of large projects almost never
> work. You lose a year (or multiple years) of person time rewriting
> instead of adding features, or if you also add features to the old
> version in parallel, you have to also port those features to the new
> version (over a really long time period). It's theoretically
> possible to do, but in practice it almost never works, he says. I
> don't know, I've never been involved in an attempt like that from
> start to finish.
I agree. The Bio::Moose stuff is an initial attempt to see if it's
worth porting code to Moose (I think it will be, but we'll see). If
anything it'll be a port and will simplify the code. bioperl6 is
similar in scope, using some concepts we would learn first from
Bio::Moose, but with the additional fun of grammar-based parsing.
>> Okay I rambled, hope that was helpful.
> Quite helpful! Please keep it up if you can!
Just don't waste too much time talkin' and not spend enough time codin'
More information about the Bioperl-l