On 5/8/18 7:15 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Steffen, > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 07:02:34PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote: >> The registry of Bioconda packages (https://bioconda.github.io/recipes) >> is not really a registry in the sense that the description of the >> package would dominate. As such we would be misusing that field in >> debian/upstream/metadata a bit. But then again, Bioconda seems like it >> is gonna stay and and I am using it myself on our University cluster. I >> tend to think that knowing about a package to also exist in Bioconda is >> of interest for our users. >> >> What are your feelings about something like >> >> Registry: >> - Name: Bioconda >> Entry: barrnap > I'd consider this kind of link a "wider sense of registry" - so no > real problem with this. > >> which would then show to >> https://bioconda.github.io/recipes/barrnap/README.html in our task >> pages. Helpful? Distracting? Disturbing? > I'm not fully sure. Its helpful to have some matching between Debian > and bioconda packages. However, propagating a link to some kind of > competing method to install the software might be distracting. I'm > undecided how to consume this kind of registry data. I then propose not do address any such mapping by ourselves. Instead,
we shall support the registries and avoid any such redundancies. Best, Steffen
