[Bioperl-l] bioperl-dev or branch?
hlapp at gmx.net
Thu May 21 21:33:52 EDT 2009
On May 21, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Robert Buels wrote:
> Just to clarify, it doesn't look like bioperl-dev is actually in a
> separate repo, it's just separated from bioperl-live as a different
> distribution, but still in the 'bioperl' repository.
True, actually, my mistake. I guess I was assuming from the early days
of cvs that these are actually different repositories. Sorry 'bout that.
So in essence bioperl-dev and bioperl-live are different directory
trees within the same repository.
On May 21, 2009, at 5:52 PM, Chris Fields wrote:
> The key aspect that started this all is to have a lean (read: few
> dependencies, relatively stable) core set of modules. Other related
> modules which add additional dependencies could be moved into a
> bioperl-tools. And (finally) anything lacking the guarantee of API
> stability would be bioperl-dev. I think several other alternatives
> came up but these seemed to be the final ones.
> core = minimal functionality
> tools = complete functionality (requires core)
> dev = experimental APIs, etc (requires core and possibly tools)
I do like this. Am I right that the way we should be looking at this
is as disjoint subsets that as a total make up BioPerl. So a module
would be found in one and only one subset, and if I wanted the entire
BioPerl package I download each one. Bioperl-dev then isn't for
holding different (e.g., more experimental) versions of the same
modules that are also in bioperl-core (aka bioperl-live).
Likewise, each subset then has its tags and branches and main trunk,
right? (Though hopefully the release tags would be present in all)
That sounds all good to me, except that bioperl-dev has Bio/Root/*
replicated. It should not, right? If we want to introduce experimental
changes to Bio/Root modules, they should go into a bioperl-live
branch, right? (Otherwise I'm confused what a bioperl-live branch is
So in this picture Chase's project would go into bioperl-dev, main
trunk. Users would obtain it by downloading bioperl-dev from svn or as
package and simply install on top of a Bioperl-core package, without
fear of clobbering stable modules that came with Bioperl-core. Right?
If that's the idea it makes a lot of sense to me and seems sane.
Conversely, using bioperl-dev as another way to branch bioperl-core
modules doesn't, though I may be missing something.
(I hope I'm making sense. Please do say if I'm not ...)
: Hilmar Lapp -:- Durham, NC -:- hlapp at gmx dot net :
More information about the Bioperl-l