[Biopython-dev] Preparing for Biopython 1.48

[Peter]

Tiago wrote:
>> First, my apologies for not reporting back from BOSC,but I was in a
>> conference/professional visit spree for the last 3 months, returned last
>> most. Basically it was not OK: I arrived there from a previous conference
>> and did the presentation without little sleep, it was probably the
>> sloppiest presentation in my whole life. My sincere apologies.

I hardly dared ask how you felt at the end of your almost round the
world trip ;)

Jared wrote:
> Despite Tiago's self-criticism I thought his BOSC presentation was fine and
> up to par with the rest of them.
>
> jared

That sounds much more positive :)

This reminds me that I could/should make a PDF version of the BOSC
2008 slides to go online here:
http://biopython.org/wiki/Documentation#Presentations

>> On a better front, I have a lot of new content for Bio.PopGen, a few
>> remarks:
>> 1. No documentation and testing done, so I will skip adding content to
>> 1.48.  But I will surely add to 1.49.

That sounds sensible, and another reason to get Biopython 1.48 out
soon.  Depending how my day goes tomorrow, I could try then.

>> 2. None of the new content relies on scipy (as there was no agreement on
>> that), but being able to use scipy would make things much easier. Most of
>> anything that can be called "population genetics" is nothing more than
>> statistics (statistics were invented because of population genetics). So a
>> change in policy would be welcomed (and would make Bio.PopGen really
>> useful for a wide audience - currently it has only niche users).

Let's get the move from Numeric to NumPy done after Biopython 1.48,
and re-open the possible SciPy dependency question then.

>> In another front, we published a paper using content from Bio.PopGen 1.44
>> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/9/323

Excellent,

Peter