Hey all, it's super cool to see this happening!!
I'm also very strongly supporting the idea of bioconda+debian~>biology
training material(s), including the Jugend vorsicht! (Youth beware? :D)
I'll be in the BioHackathon in Greater Paris as well.
For the ELIXIR folks: Do you think we should apply for (an)
Implementation Study|ies around these integrations? Would that make
sense, and would it have a chance to get funding? In addition to the
Tools Platform, the Training Platform might be interested. (there could
be positive implications also for training, Galaxy, BioContainers(?),
...)
All best!
Matus
On 2019-09-24 01:03, Steffen Möller wrote:
On 22.09.19 17:04, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi Steffen,
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 04:36:47PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
Thanks for this effort. I've seen your commits.
Thank you for preparing the udd.
The conda:channel syntax was meant to prepare for the many flavours
of
conda that are out there.
I've seen this but its useless (as I explained in debian-blends).
Please do *not* only change the template since it has no effect at
all.
Somehow a second commit got stuck while on the train.
The root is with conda-force. And this is also
where the Debian-Science-maintained package datamash is:
https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/datamash .
Lets see once the first datamash registry will arrive. These should
be
documented in https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata as a valid
Registry. Once it is documented there it will be implemented in the
code. Everything else is error prone and does not bring us forward.
Good idea, will do that.
My preferred way to perform these additions would be by assigning a
list
of Debian package names and conda recipe/package names. Then let some
bot perform the editing. The idea to check out everything locally
while
working on my laptop is nothing that I am prepared to do. But you are
right. I should stop doing this all via the salsa web interface.
Best,
Steffen
