[Biococoa-dev] Subversion proposal [correction]

Peter Schols peter.schols at bio.kuleuven.be
Tue Mar 7 05:54:35 EST 2006

Hi Alex,

> Very good, just 2 remarks:
> - My version is not the last version of BioCocoa, it doesn't  
> contain the code to write files, if that could be added, we would  
> be set.

That's right, that's why we will include BioCocoa 1.6 as another tag.  
People needing the BCCreator class could use that version from 1.6,  
or combine BCCreator with 1.7 (your code)

> - We should also transfer a copy of the views I added and the  
> additional support for reading binary strider and GCK files to the  
> trunk:

We should do this as soon as these parts use our own foundation  
classes, at least that's what Charles was saying and that's what I  
agreed upon. Otherwise it's becoming really confusing.

Here is a summary of the discussion (from my point of view):

Peter: let's put only the CVS code in the SVN repository and have  
Alex's code as a simple download
Alex: I agree
Charles: I don't agree, let's put Alex's code in SVN too
Peter & Alex: OK let's do that, and let's put it in the trunk
Charles: No, let's put Alex's code in a separate tag
Peter: Is it good to have tags containing code that's not in the trunk?
Charles: It's not ideal, but it might be the best solution
Peter: OK I see why this is a good solution, so we'll put Alex's code  
(BioCocoa 1.7) and my code (BioCocoa 1.6) in two separate tags and  
keep the trunk for classes that use our own BCFoundation.

and now the last line appears to be:
Alex: let's put my code (or at least parts of it) in the trunk!

I thought we finally agreed to put all non-BCSequence code into  
separate tags (= stable, usable versions) and put all other code in  
trunk (= what will be BioCocoa 2.0)


Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm

More information about the Biococoa-dev mailing list