[Biopython-dev] Abstract for "Biopython Project Update" at BOSC 2013

[Eric Talevich]

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > First a general reminder that the BOSC 2013 abstract deadline is
> > this coming Friday 12 April, http://www.open-bio.org/wiki/BOSC_2013
> >
> > Second, we need to prepare an abstract for the traditional Biopython
> > Project update. Both Brad and I should be there for BOSC 2013,
> > and the preceding mini hackathon/codefest to which everyone is
> > welcome: http://www.open-bio.org/wiki/Codefest_2013
> >
> > Who else is planning to be at BOSC 2013 (and the Codefest), and
> > is there anyone keen to present the update? I'm happy to give the
> > talk, but this is a nice chance for someone else to present and give
> > a more rounded impression of the Biopython developers ;)
> >
> > According to http://biopython.org/wiki/Documentation#Presentations
> > the recent Biopython presenters at BOSC have been:
> >
> > BOSC 2013, Berlin, Germany - ???
> > BOSC 2012, Long beach, USA - Eric
> > BOSC 2011, Vienna, Austria - Peter
> > BOSC 2010, Boston, USA - Brad
> > BOSC 2009, Stockholm, Sweden - Peter
> > BOSC 2008, Toronto, Canada - Tiago
> > BOSC 2007, Vienna, Austria - Peter
> > BOSC 2006, Fortaleza, Brazil - No one
> > ...
> >
> > So, any volunteers from our development team? I know from
> > personal experience that giving a talk can be very useful for
> > securing travel funding - and we can if need be ask the BOSC
> > committee to waive the registration fee (in a new initiative for this
> > year at BOSC).
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Peter
> > (Disclaimer: I'm also on the BOSC committee)
>
> Looks like it will be me giving the talk then (although
> its not too late to change that if needed). I've attached
> the abstract as it stands, assuming we get a talk slot
> then we'll be able to make some revisions during the
> review process (the BOSC review panel may have
> comments to address).
>
> Feedback from you all is welcome too of course.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Peter
>

The abstract looks good to me. Which release was the first to include
SearchIO, was that 1.61? If so, maybe it would be good to note that in
addition to the smaller improvements, SearchIO specifically was (one of?)
the new module(s) that introduced the beta designation.