[Biopython] Biopython Tutorial no longer written in LaTeX, but RST

[Iddo Friedberg]

On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 4:51 AM Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 9:09 PM Iddo Friedberg <idoerg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 2:44 PM Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Off list?
> >
> > Sure.
>
> I guessed you went off list by mistake.
>


Yes, sorry. Back on, so everyone can benefit from my keen insights /s


>
> >> I too used to search it that way. Not sure how well Sphinx's search
> >> box works in comparison - but that was a benefit of the single HTML
> >> file vs multiple files.
> >
> > Or the HTML :)  Perhaps a one-page HTML document can be
> > generated from the RST pages? Or would there be an indexing
> > mechanism (less desirable).
>
> The multi-page HTML has a search function.
>


It does, but it looks like it does not' limit itself to a specific document
subtree: looks like the search is not confined to the, say, cookbook &
tutorial only.


>
> Strangely the single page HTML output does not, but it may as side
> effect from the additional warnings Sphinx spits out.
>
> I think the single page PDF looks like the best bet.
>
> >> As to the authorship, that crossed my mind too. The Sphinx author
> >> field gets used in the footer so short and sweet as it stands seems
> >> fine: "© Copyright 1999-2024, The Biopython Contributors."
> >>
> >> Rather I on this page between the title and the table of contents
> >> might work nicely? https://biopython.org/docs/dev/Tutorial/index.html
> >
> > Yes, I think a named author section would be nice there. And I'm not
> > jsut saying that becuase I'm on there ;) but also to preserve some
> > sense fo history.
>
> Grin.
>
> > We might want to revise the copyright to CC-BY though?
>
> That would have been a good call in hindsight when we started the
> BSD dual licensing process.
>
> The tutorial is part of the main repository and thus under our
> Biopython specific license. We may be able to apply the BSD as
> well with all the history contributor agreements (I haven't checked).
>

So we can write that the docs are also under the Dual Biopython / BSD
license, it's good enough, for most practical purposes (reuse &
accreditation).  The copyright without additions  implies no reuse /
redistribution.  But you can add instead "Copyright 1999-2024, The
Biopython Contributors, may be reused under the Biopython License (linked)."



>
> Peter
>


-- 
Iddo Friedberg

++++++++++[>+++>++++++>++++++++>++++++++++>+++++++++++<<<<<-]>>>>++++.>
++++++..----.<<<<++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.-----------..>>>+.-----.
.>-.<<<<--.>>>++.>+++.<+++.----.-.<++++++++++++++++++.>+.>.<++.<<<+.>>
>>----.<--.>++++++.<<<<------------------------------------.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.open-bio.org/pipermail/biopython/attachments/20240105/34a7f6e8/attachment.htm>