The guidelines for the CCP4BB are extremely broad and certainly include
discussion of other software packages. Since the original poster's question
had to do with a specific problem with CCP4, it would have been appropriate
for Pavel to prefix his reply with something like "I hope you receive an
answer to your question shortly, but in the meantime here is an alternative".
But this is a nicety I would be glad to forgo for the sake of getting the
extra information. The problem is not that the phenix team was so quick
to promote their software, but rather that now 14 hours after the original
post, no one has answered the CCP4 question. It is too easy to say "yes,
I think I could help this guy, but half the readers of this BB could
probably give a better answer". Maybe someone at CCP4 should be assigned
to answer all reasonable queries that go unanswered for more than 8 hours.
The phenomenal rise in popularity of the phenix package is probably due as
much to the incredible responsiveness of the phenix team, not only in support
but in adding requested features, as it is to the power and ease of use of
the programs.
Vellieux Frederic wrote:
Hi Dirk,
When it happens that I reply to a ccp4bb message and that the answer, or
solution I may have (which I think is "better" or "more appropriate")
involves using non-ccp4 programs, I do it off-list. By replying
privately to the person who asked the question.
Fred.
Dirk Kostrewa wrote:
Dear Gerard,
I can only agree with you - I've also noticed a growing and sometimes
irritating cross-advertisement of non-CCP4 programs on the CCP4BB over
the last months (mainly Phenix). Unless, the specific task that was
asked for, can only be (reasonably) solved with non-CCP4 programs,
such replies leave a somewhat bad aftertaste.
Personally, I think, it would be perfectly acceptable if both
solutions with CCP4 programs and other programs would be given, so
that the user may choose, or try them all.
Best wishes,
Dirk.
