Re: [Bioperl-l] Are all recommended modules equally important ?
Hi all,
I have looked at which modules are in a separate pacakge in Debian:
Le Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:29:10AM +0000, Sendu Bala a écrit :
> I looked at the most used external modules. Used 6 times or more:
>
> Data::Dumper => used 55 times
perl
> Carp => used 51 times
perl-base
> IO::String => used 25 times
libio-string-perl
> Symbol => used 19 times
perl-base
> File::Spec => used 17 times
perl-base, libfile-spec-perl (newer version)
> HTTP::Request::Common => used 17 times
libwww-perl
> POSIX => used 12 times
perl-base
> DB_File => used 11 times
perl
> Fcntl => used 11 times
perl-base
> IO::File => used 11 times
perl-base
> Exporter => used 10 times
perl-base
> File::Temp => used 9 times
perl-modules, libfile-temp-perl
> Dumpvalue => used 8 times
perl-modules
> LWP::UserAgent => used 8 times
libwww-perl
> Scalar::Util => used 8 times
perl-base
> URI::Escape => used 8 times
liburi-perl
> File::Basename => used 6 times
perl-modules
> File::Path => used 6 times
perl-modules
> XML::Writer => used 6 times
libxml-writer-perl
Therefore, I propose to keep libio-string-perl, libwww-perl, liburi-perl and
libxml-writer-perl as Recommends, and downgrate the other modules as Suggests.
This, plus the statement that 1.5.2 is the de facto stable version would in mh
opinion be enough to let bioperl 1.5.2 migrate into Testing.
By the way, is there a way to install package with all the 'Suggest'ed
dependancies, something like aptitude install bioperl --with-suggested ? I have
not found anything in the manpage (and it would also be useful for T-Coffee…).
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
http://charles.plessy.org
Wakō, Saitama, Japan
Reply to: