Chris Fields

That's basically it. This leaves the core fairly lean, and we can make it leaner by cleaving out other modules with their own dependencies.

If the modules are added to core you can go ahead and remove them; if you want to preserve history, there is a nice writeup on the bioperl wiki on...

Forgot to mention, @Leprevost if you want to put this under the bioperl namespace we can do that. I can set up the repo and add you to the admins...

Individual repos. I suppose we could technically rearrange everything within one repo, but I think it would get hairy very quickly. I think we can (for developers) create a simple...

Hi @prvst . I thought the plan was to release it as a separate set of modules to CPAN (see https://github.com/bioperl/bioperl-live/pull/61#issuecomment-30439081), hence the long silence. Well, that and I've been...

@hlapp The purpose is really to place more power and responsibility with the original developers, both so they can make changes to their own code as well as make independent...

Yep, it was a bit of fun :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

We've had instances where we would like to rerun the workflow but tweak the bismark methylation extraction step w/o having to rerun the full pipeline. In particular I noticed a...

> Separately, NuGEN UMI support would be nice to add. It's quite a common kit type, there's a good chance that we'll also want to run with this in the...

I should add, I went into PAUSE after the post and added @carandraug to one of the modules (`Bio::Tools::AnalysisResult`). The other (`Bio::Search::Tiling::MapTileUtils `) isn't showing up at all in the...