[Bioperl-l] Are all recommended modules equally important ?
bix at sendu.me.uk
Tue Mar 18 09:29:10 UTC 2008
Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Dave Messina wrote:
>> Hi Charles,
>> Thanks for your note.
>> All of the BioPerl 'recommended' modules involve optional
>> functionality, so
>> I would think all of them would map to 'suggested' under Debian so they
>> won't be installed by default.
> I would probably elevate LWP to 'recommended.' Other than that I agree.
I looked at the most used external modules. Used 6 times or more:
Data::Dumper => used 55 times
Carp => used 51 times
IO::String => used 25 times
Symbol => used 19 times
File::Spec => used 17 times
HTTP::Request::Common => used 17 times
POSIX => used 12 times
DB_File => used 11 times
Fcntl => used 11 times
IO::File => used 11 times
Exporter => used 10 times
File::Temp => used 9 times
Dumpvalue => used 8 times
LWP::UserAgent => used 8 times
Scalar::Util => used 8 times
URI::Escape => used 8 times
File::Basename => used 6 times
File::Path => used 6 times
XML::Writer => used 6 times
I can never remember how to figure out which of those is included with
Except maybe XML::Writer, if we do want to promote anything to
recommended, I suppose it would be those above.
I also agree with everything Dave said; if it's easier everything can be
(I reckon most if not all of the Data::Dumper and Carp usages should be
More information about the Bioperl-l