[Bioperl-l] Contributing to biomoose
cjfields at illinois.edu
Mon Jul 20 00:22:41 EDT 2009
I'm actually working on Bio::Moose::Annotation along with tests (I
have SimpleValue, Reference, Comment, Target, and DBLink working).
I'll try committing that tonight, but first I'll take a look at your
code and try to make sure ours merge properly. I don't see any
conflicts thus far.
A ROADMAP is a good idea; I'll definitely work towards that. As for
specific modules, there are lots of places to start:
Bio::Align* and Bio::SimpleAlign (just the basic functionality)?
The IO parsers should fall into place rather quickly once the basic
objects are in place, I wouldn't worry about them for the moment; we
need basic implementations and tests. Bio::Annotation::Collection is
where I'm going next.
Just make sure to 'use Bio::Moose' or 'use Bio::Moose::Role', and have
the namespace in Bio::Moose so it doesn't conflict with regular
BioPerl, e.g. 'Bio::Moose::Tree', roles maybe as
'Bio::Moose::Roles::Tree'. We will need to test these against their
BioPerl counterparts sometime.
I'll also add an AUTHORS file, so add your name in when you can.
PS: Based on our recent discussions on-list about breaking up BioPerl,
I'm wondering whether we'll need an eventual Bio::MooseX. May be
something to think about.
On Jul 19, 2009, at 9:23 PM, Siddhartha Basu wrote:
> Hi chris,
> I have forked your 'biomoose' git project and recently added bunch of
> roles in my master in addition to the one (Annotation) you have
> merged. So far, these were mostly interface centric module and were
> quite easy
> to implement. Here is my github link ....
> Anyway, i want to contribute with other module but wondering which
> modules would be a good target particularly leaving those out which
> you/others are working or have plans to work on. Any
> suggestions/ideas/roadmaps will be really helpful.
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
More information about the Bioperl-l