Re: References to registries -> debian-med policy?
Hi Andreas,
On 10.09.17 20:22, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Steffen,
>
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 01:18:46PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
>> this morning brought updates to references to research software
>> catalogues (SciCruch RRIDs, OMICtools, bio.tools) to packages referenced
>> in Debian Med's "NGS" task. At some point we need to decide what
>> packages should be in what task, but that is for another email. The
>> other bio-tasks I will go through as time permits.
> I confirm that I'm not happy about the maintenance of our bio-* tasks
> and that I do not consider these very useful for our users.
We could adopt categories of the catalogues we are referring to.
Different subsections of the blend could have different reference
catalogs. For the bio packages this could be the ones of OMICtools
or we just use the topics of the EDAM ontology. For medical software
we still need to wait for catalogs to emerge.
>
>> Would you mind me
>> adding this process to the Debian Med policy?
> Feel free to enhance our documentation!
I have added a sentence to the Debian Med policy and also pushed
the "Registry:" entry for the UpstreamMetadata wiki page that our
policy is pointing to.
>
>> You may be aware of
>> OMICtools already providing links to our packages and RRIDs are
>> referenced in CWL tool descriptions to auto-provide the software
>> infrastructure for executing CWL-described workflows. In my perception,
>> these references are important to anchor our distribution in the
>> Computational Biology community, so I would also like to anchor those
>> references in the policy.
> Just to let you know: I planed to add this extra information to our
> tasks pages at DebConf. I only managed to do the first half of the task
> to include the information into UDD.
I somehow remember to have done something on our task pages
before, like a decade ago. If you could start with one of the registries
and point me to your work so I can fast-forward on how the UDD
is read etc, then I would add the other registries and handle the NA.
> If I would not be that busy to fix RC + important bugs in our packages I
> would continue with this. So anybody who want the metadata displayed on
> the tasks pages soon should start fixing bugs - this would really help a
> lot.
Hm. Well. I have been a bit better over the last two weeks than may
average density of contributions over the past years would have predicted
me to be ;o)
Steffen
Reply to: