On 06/02/13 06:59, Fields, Christopher J wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Carnë Draug
>> On 5 February 2013 19:34, Fields, Christopher J
>>> Probably should retitle this to ask the question directly (make sure
the right radars are pinged).
>>> My vote is yes, it should be removed. There were a lot of
implementation issues with it that ended up becoming problematic. I do
believe it is used, though, so I would like to get additional responses
from the community before removing it and pointing to the separate
repository (where there has been a lot of experimenting going on).
>> Mentioning Bio::FeatureIO was just an example. I meant to ask it as
>> more general. If the code is already in a separate repository, should
>> it be removed from bioperl-live?
> Yes for Bio::FeatureIO, no for Bio::Root::Root and the others at the
moment (I want to get a release out by March 1, which I'm planning on
announcing later today, so the less disruptive it is the better). Once we
get a new release out we should remove the rest.
> Bioperl-l mailing list
> [email protected]
Sounds good to me (I've been burnt once by the fact that Bio::FeatureIO
is in two places).