[Bioperl-l] github -- pull request for adding bp_ to scripts

[Chris Fields]

I responded to that:

http://lists.open-bio.org/pipermail/bioperl-l/2011-July/035425.html

I haven't heard any arguments against it, will merge in today.  We will need to ensure Build.PL is set up so the scripts are installed correctly.

chris

On Jul 25, 2011, at 9:34 AM, Carnë Draug wrote:

> Hi everyone
> 
> I made a pull request to the bioperl repo a few days ago (
> https://github.com/bioperl/bioperl-live/pull/17 ) but got no answer
> yet. The changes are on the scripts directory.
> 
> During installation, the scripts have their names changed to
> bp_something. Some of them already have the bp_ prefix on them and
> those are not changed. I simply changed the filename of all of them so
> there's no need to make changes by the install script. Also, since
> after installation all of them are named bp_something, it makes sense
> that their documentation (and man pages generated from the POD)
> reflect this. As such, I also changed their names on the
> documentation.
> 
> I asked at #bioperl back then and people seemed positive about this change:
> 
> <carandraug>  I noticed that the scripts have their names changed to
> bp_scriptname during install. Any reason why not to have the files
> already with bp? I noticed the man pages refer to the scripts without
> the bp. I forked it and was planning on fix that
> <rbuels> carandraug: i'm not sure what the logic is behind having it
> that way.  pyrimidine is likely to be in the channel pretty soon, he
> would probably know
> <rbuels> carandraug: i agree with you that it's silly
> <pyrimidine> carandraug: yes, it is silly.  I recall there being a
> reason for this at some point, but I slept since then.  I think it's
> safe to go ahead and change them.
> 
> Could someone comment on the pull request?
> 
> Thanks,
> Carnë
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> Bioperl-l at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l