[Biopython-dev] [Biopython] Presenter for Biopython Project Update talk at BOSC 2016?

[Peter Cock]

Thanks Christian,

That looks good to me - hopefully we'll get Biopython 1.67 out soon,
and then can tweak the abstract wording along with any revisions
requested by the BOSC reviewers.

(You could email the named potential co-authors directly to make
sure they see this - often people have mailing list emails auto-filtered
to sub-folders and read them less often.)

Peter

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Christian Brueffer
<christian at brueffer.de> wrote:
> On 2016-04-02 11:06, Peter Cock wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Christian Brueffer
>> <christian at brueffer.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Authors: We've had some debates about this in the past. I'm OK
>>>> with listing just the presenter and the "Biopython Contributors",
>>>> or we again try to include anyone making major contributions to
>>>> the talk slides or to Biopython in the last year (i.e. the work being
>>>> shown in the update talk).
>>>
>>> I remember the author discussion from last time;  the current author
>>> line is last year's with my addition.  From a contributor point of view
>>> I think it would be very motivating to be included in an update talk
>>> like this for major contributions.  That leaves the question of how to
>>> measure major contribution :-)  Stuff that made it into the NEWS file?
>>
>> That seems fair and roughly what I was thinking, if we don't go for
>> the simple "named presenter and un-named contributors" route.
>> You're right that where to draw the line is going to be hard - but
>> improving recognition of contributors is why we started the policy
>> of listing everyone for each release announcement and the NEWS
>> file.
>>
>> Note that the plan would be for the slides to go up on the BOSC
>> F1000 Research Channel which puts each author in the meta
>> data f1000research.com/channels/BOSC
>>
>> Using the NEWS file to determine major contributions is a good
>> idea, but so far that rarely links any new feature to a person
>> explicitly (GSoC being the most obvious exception). We could
>> try to do that in future if people feel it would be a good thing in
>> general.
>>
>
> Considering the extended deadline is close, I'll leave the author line
> as is for the submission process (minus Joao as requested), since I'd
> like to check with everyone whether or not they're OK with being
> included (plus affiliations etc).
>
> However, I'll update this as per discussion as we go along.
>
> I hope that's acceptable to everyone in the short term!
>
> If there are not more comments or improvements, I'll submit the attached
> abstract in a few hours.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Biopython-dev mailing list
> Biopython-dev at mailman.open-bio.org
> http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython-dev