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/

Reply via email to