[Bioperl-l] bioperl-dev goes live!

[Mark A. Jensen]

Certainly Build and Test should be there, right?
Yes, we could, probably should leave out the 
rest until they are being actively worked on, since 
any work should start from the latest live version, 
I suppose. dev would be a good place to play with
bequeath/bequest; perhaps it should stay there, 
since I'd like to start exploring that.

re: building bioperl-dev-- since people will 
essentially be working on "private" extensions
or enhancements, the build process shouldn't
install everything by default, but should be 
driven more by user choices than, say, the
core installation is. Is this a fair assessment?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Fields" <cjfields at illinois.edu>
To: "Mark A. Jensen" <maj at fortinbras.us>
Cc: <bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Bioperl-l] bioperl-dev goes live!


> We should be requiring a live core installation for dev, so we  
> probably don't need to have the Bio::Root stuff unless we are  
> reconfiguring those files.
> 
> chris
> 
> On Mar 28, 2009, at 12:08 AM, Mark A. Jensen wrote:
> 
>> Hi All-
>>
>> I pleased to announce the maiden voyage of bioperl-dev. I have
>> put up a stubby distribution skeleton under bioperl-dev/trunk in
>> the Subversion repository. I will let you visit it for the details,  
>> but--
>>
>> Some highlights:
>> - the HEAD revision of Bio/Root/* is present in full, as is
>> - the HEAD revision of t/lib/*, and
>> - the README that I reproduce below
>>
>> The idea behind bioperl-dev, as I understand from
>> Chris, is to provide a sort of sandbox for experimental
>> code. Adventuresome users should feel free to play with
>> the code there, but not expect much in the way of support,
>> bug fixes, and the like. There be dragons there. When a
>> bioperl-dev module graduates to the core, then the usual
>> support mechanisms kick in.
>>
>> Devs please make yourselves comfy there, and modify
>> the structure to suit. I believe it will be most useful (and
>> easiest to integrate installations into working copies of
>> the trunk) if the Bio/ subtree mimics the trunk namespace
>> (with respect to existing modules) as much as possible.
>> And if I'm really off-base someplace, please fix it and/or
>> let me know.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mark
>>
>> README:
>>
>> $Id: README 15616 2009-03-28 04:49:43Z maj $
>>
>> o Version
>>
>> This is bioperl-dev version 1.6.9, a developer release.
>>
>> o Description
>>
>> bioperl-dev contains experimental modules intended to expand the
>> Bioperl envelope. New ideas for future point and stable releases
>> are being explored here. Interested users are encouraged to
>> give these a try, keeping in mind the following points:
>>
>> o the modules here will likely depend on the current HEAD
>>   revision of Bioperl (bioperl-live/trunk); a release version
>>   may not suffice;
>>
>> o documentation is likely to be spotty at best;
>>
>> o the code should be considered unsupported, though a polite email
>>   to the dev it likely to elicit a positive response;
>>
>> o the code should not be considered "production quality"; when this
>>   level is reached, bioperl-dev modules will graduate to the
>>   core or the appropriate specialty package.
>>
>> See the Changes file for more information about what is contained in
>> here.
>>
>> o Installation
>>
>> See the accompanying INSTALL file for details on installing
>> bioperl-dev
>>
>> o Feedback
>>
>> Write down any problems or praise and send them to
>> bioperl-l at bioperl.org  ;-)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bioperl-l mailing list
>> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
>> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
> 
> 
>