Hi Kevin, On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 11:15:12PM +1000, Kevin Murray wrote: > > Andreas/Michael may remember differently, but from memory we will have: > > - SeqAn 1.x in src:seqan -> seqan-dev (only, no apps) > - SeqAn 2.x in src:seqan2 -> libseqan2-dev and seqan-apps (and one day -doc)
Ahhh, this somehow shades light in my weak memory. Makes sense and if we are lucky the gcc-6 issue does not affect the seqan(1)-dev part. > So yes, I agree with you. Seqan 1.x (i.e. src:seqan) should be made to build > correctly and not get booted from testing (and git should be reverted such > that > it contains only 1.x). Especially while the likes of bowtie & tophat rely upon > them. (Though for smaller tools, providing patches to get them to build with > seqan 2.x shouldn't be monumentally difficult and should be qulte > upstream-able). ACK for the plan in general. What about the sequence for realisation. Should we may be try to reate libseqan1-dev (and droping seqan1-apps) soon? When writing it: Should we may be keep the name seqan for version 2 and specify the number one only on the old version? Thanks for your insight. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de