Leon Timmermans | 8 Feb 13:08 2013

Re: BioPerl long-term, was Re: dependencies on perl version

On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 5:12 AM, Carnë Draug <carandraug+dev <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Short version:
> I'd recommend to split the project into much smaller ones. Some of the
> small ones will wither and die but those are the less important ones,
> and will allow the others, the ones that people care about, freedom to
> grow faster. Bioperl would still be just one project, that
> incorporates a hundred or so of smaller modules. Let those who care
> the most about a specific module to take care of it and make the
> releases. Releasing a module becomes much simpler, which means more
> releases, more activity, and the smaller code base for each module
> also make it less intimidating for new contributors.

That has been a goal for some time now, but it's fairly complicated.
Not only do we have a LOT of modules (bioperl-live alone is more than
900), they also have complicated dependencies. I've attached the
results of my static dependency analysis of bioperl-live. I suspect
this split-up needs to done by automated graph analysis, it's too much
to do by hand.

Attachment (deps.dot): application/octet-stream, 123 KiB
Bioperl-l mailing list
Bioperl-l <at> lists.open-bio.org