Poll: is biojava a framework or library?

--===============5080097579876545081==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e2717b057cc4932a"

--000000000000e2717b057cc4932a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

We've previously referred to BioJava pretty consistently as a framework
(e.g. the last paper was "BioJava: an open-source framework for
bioinformatics in 2012"). However, in the current world of Angular and
Rails, "framework" has required a more specific meaning relating to
inversion of control and clear separation between the "frozen" framework
code and the "hot" user-extensible part.

On the other hand, a "library" sounds like a collection of procedures for a
single task, and BioJava has a lot of breadth. We have lots of modules
doing very different bioinformatics tasks, and user code would typically
only include part of BioJava. We also have a few user interfaces and
command line tools included, although I consider these more like example
code then proper distributables.

What do you think? Should we refer to BioJava as a 'library' in the future,
or should we continue to use "framework" on the website and in publications?

-Spencer

Links:

   -
   https://www.programcreek.com/2011/09/what-is-the-difference-between-a-java-library-and-a-framework/
   - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework

--000000000000e2717b057cc4932a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div di=
r=3D"ltr">We&#39;ve previously referred to BioJava pretty consistently as a=
 framework (e.g. the last paper was &quot;BioJava: an open-source framework=
 for bioinformatics in 2012&quot;). However, in the current world of Angula=
r and Rails, &quot;framework&quot; has required a more specific meaning rel=
ating to inversion of control and clear separation between the &quot;frozen=
&quot; framework code and the &quot;hot&quot; user-extensible part.</div><d=
iv dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><div>On the other hand, a &quot;library&quot; soun=
ds like a collection of procedures for a single task, and BioJava has a lot=
 of breadth. We have lots of modules doing very different bioinformatics ta=
sks, and user code would typically only include part of BioJava. We also ha=
ve a few user interfaces and command line tools included, although I consid=
er these more like example code then proper distributables.</div><div dir=
=3D"ltr"><br></div><div>What do you think? Should we refer to BioJava as a =
&#39;library&#39; in the future, or should we continue to use &quot;framewo=
rk&quot; on the website and in publications?</div><div><br></div><div>-Spen=
cer</div><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><div>Links:</div><div><ul><li><a href=
=3D"https://www.programcreek.com/2011/09/what-is-the-difference-between-a-j=
ava-library-and-a-framework/">https://www.programcreek.com/2011/09/what-is-=
the-difference-between-a-java-library-and-a-framework/</a><br></li><li><a h=
ref=3D"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework">https://en.wikiped=
ia.org/wiki/Software_framework</a><br></li></ul></div><div><br></div></div>=
</div></div></div>

--000000000000e2717b057cc4932a--

--===============5080097579876545081==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Biojava-l mailing list  -  [email protected]
http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l
--===============5080097579876545081==--