Before we start a religious war, can we make progress on the pragmatic goal of making it possible to provide such URLs to people?
There are two concepts - ‘the package' - a specific version, running in a specific environment, ‘frozen’, etc. (Gabe) - ‘the package’ - as a concept and a living artifact (me, Bernd, Tim) Both are useful. And having URLs for both would also be useful. Wolfgang > On Mar 23, 2015, at 18:43 GMT+1, Tim Triche, Jr. <tim.tri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I just meant that the mnemonic link > > http://www.bioconductor.org/limma/ (SEO version of limma ;-)) > > could dump people at something like > > http://www.bioconductor.org/release/limma/3.22.7/ (I'd prefer this) > > or if need be for backwards compatibility, > > http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/3.0/limma/3.22.7/ (seems less good) > > instead of > > http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/3.0/bioc/html/limma.html (current) > > and furthermore the specific version page could note more prominently that > the build of limma being referenced at that particular instance in time may > or may not be the same as was cited in a paper, used in an analysis, > available for download the previous evening, etc. thus citation("limma") is > a Very Good Idea when writing up results that depend upon it. Because even > the WEHI guys could theoretically have a bug that impacted someone's > results (as opposed to the usual case of Didn't Read The Fine Limma Manual) > > Does that make more sense? (Probably not, but worth a try) > > Statistics is the grammar of science. > Karl Pearson <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grammar_of_Science> > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Dan Tenenbaum <dtene...@fredhutch.org> > wrote: > >> >> >> On March 23, 2015 9:18:57 AM PDT, "Tim Triche, Jr." <tim.tri...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Packages are (read: should be, IMHO) published, citable pieces of >>> research, though. Imagine if a paper you cite were silently updated >>> without the doi/citation changing. That wouldn't be good >>> >>> I don't disagree, but the existing setup does nothing to address that. >>> Citation('limma'), for example, does. >>> >>> .../release/... and .../devel/... can change at any time, potentially >>> overnight (with or without a new BioC release). The only real way to >>> cite an exact version is to cite that exact version, which is already >>> the proper way to do things and would remain unaffected by this, at >>> least AFAIK. >>> >>> Perhaps a useful addendum would be for the mnemonic >>> >>> http://bioconductor.org/limma >>> >>> To redirect to >>> >>> >> http://bioconductor.org/packages/limma/whateverTheMostRecentStableVersionMayBe/ >>> >>> And then everything is explicit. >>> >>> Does that address the competing issues discussed herein? >> >> >> Note that 'release' and 'devel' are just symlinks to the current release >> and devel versions. I.e. currently 3.0 and 3.1 respectively. So you can >> always link directly to a specific version. >> >> Dan >> >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> --t >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel >> >> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > _______________________________________________ > Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel _______________________________________________ Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel