There has been a good number of BioPerl threads in the mailing list [0] last week about how to make BioPerl more fitted to the current times.
[0] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.perl.bio.general
I like the phrase of George Hartzell about being able to move forward because we need to support Perl 5.8
But why should the all-volunteer BioPerl community be stuck supporting
code from 12 years ago because it's cost effective for someone else to
avoid spending *their* $/time/people to stay up to date.
And the links to the discussion:
Next BioPerl release : http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.perl.bio.general/26348
dependencies on perl version : http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.perl.bio.general/26344
BioPerl future : http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.perl.bio.general/26394
removing packages from bioperl-live: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.perl.bio.general/26341
Posts
1 comment:
We've been long talking about doing this. However, I feel like this has become more and more a 1 or 2-person effort (lately Florent Angly and myself), with a lot of cheering from the sidelines. BioPerl is a huge project; we need more than cheering, we need people to get directly involved, pinpoint what needs to be fixed, discuss potentials, and dive in. We're working on making that possible sooner (maybe this week) than later.
Post a Comment