Hi Peter, Production servers, or any server where you have users, should always track Galaxy-dist.
Galaxy-central is a development repo (you get access to the "latest and greatest", but also should Expect more bugs to pop up at any given time), from the Galaxy-central header on bitbucket: "Main development repository for Galaxy. Active development happens here, and this repository is thus intended for those working on Galaxy development. See http://bitbucket.org/galaxy/galaxy-dist/ for a more stable repository intended for end-users." Its really a personal choice that each (tool) developer will have to make based upon whether they consider themselves to be a pure end-user (just adding tools or running a Galaxy server) who only wants to work on a "stable" branch; or if they want to contribute to Core development or gain early access to development features (and bugs). I would say that finalized tools and e.g. tools submitted to the tool shed should be vetted against galaxy-dist. Thanks for using Galaxy, Dan On Jun 16, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Peter Cock wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Daniel Blankenberg <d...@bx.psu.edu> wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> If you were curious it was fixed about 7 hours later in 5681:0886ed0a8c9f >> >> Thanks for using Galaxy, >> >> Dan > > Thanks - I know this kind of unexpected breakage is inevitable sometimes, > but would recommend tool developers in general run with galaxy-dist or > galaxy-central? > > Peter
___________________________________________________________ Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all" in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at: http://lists.bx.psu.edu/