Thanks for clarifying. We can include the Taverna 3 process for using the
web services in our documentation (helping with backward-compatibility).

I also agree with moving it for now.

Gale

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:09 AM Thilina Manamgoda <maanafun...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think  that's a good idea. We can fix those license issue seperatly and
> bring it back.
>
> Thanks,
> Thilina
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Ian Dunlop <ianwdun...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > They can still use the web services - just takes a little bit more effort
> > since they have to find and configure them themselves. I guess this is
> what
> > the biocat perspective brings to the table. I think it is safer to move
> it
> > to extras for the time being rather than spending effort on chasing down
> > the provenance of some files.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ian
> >
> > On 21 September 2016 at 15:49, Gale Naylor <ga...@noventussolutions.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If we don't release the BioCatalogue perspective as part of Taverna 3,
> is
> > > there a way for users to continue using those BioCatalogue web
> services,
> > or
> > > do we lose that capability?
> > >
> > > Gale
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:56 AM alaninmcr <alanin...@googlemail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 21/09/2016 13:26, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > > I don't know how much the Biocatalogue perspective is used in
> Taverna
> > > > > 2.5 - I know it can be very useful to find and use lots of web
> > > > > services - so arguably it would be a bit of a loss. It also has
> lots
> > > > > of code to replicate in Java Swing what is also on the
> > > > > biocatalogue.org website - that is perhaps not as needed.
> > > >
> > > > My long-standing opinion is that Taverna should not attempt to
> > replicate
> > > > a website, whether biocatalogue or myExperiment :)
> > > >
> > > > > What's your take?
> > > >
> > > > I agree with moving it out to extras.
> > > >
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to