Re: [Biopython] Presenter for Biopython Project Update talk at BOSC 2016?

I've just submitted the abstract.  Fingers crossed :-)

Cheers,

Chris


On 2016-04-04 12:42, Peter Cock wrote:
> Thanks Christian,
> 
> That looks good to me - hopefully we'll get Biopython 1.67 out soon,
> and then can tweak the abstract wording along with any revisions
> requested by the BOSC reviewers.
> 
> (You could email the named potential co-authors directly to make
> sure they see this - often people have mailing list emails auto-filtered
> to sub-folders and read them less often.)
> 
> Peter
> 
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Christian Brueffer
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2016-04-02 11:06, Peter Cock wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Christian Brueffer
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Authors: We've had some debates about this in the past. I'm OK
>>>>> with listing just the presenter and the "Biopython Contributors",
>>>>> or we again try to include anyone making major contributions to
>>>>> the talk slides or to Biopython in the last year (i.e. the work being
>>>>> shown in the update talk).
>>>>
>>>> I remember the author discussion from last time;  the current author
>>>> line is last year's with my addition.  From a contributor point of view
>>>> I think it would be very motivating to be included in an update talk
>>>> like this for major contributions.  That leaves the question of how to
>>>> measure major contribution :-)  Stuff that made it into the NEWS file?
>>>
>>> That seems fair and roughly what I was thinking, if we don't go for
>>> the simple "named presenter and un-named contributors" route.
>>> You're right that where to draw the line is going to be hard - but
>>> improving recognition of contributors is why we started the policy
>>> of listing everyone for each release announcement and the NEWS
>>> file.
>>>
>>> Note that the plan would be for the slides to go up on the BOSC
>>> F1000 Research Channel which puts each author in the meta
>>> data f1000research.com/channels/BOSC
>>>
>>> Using the NEWS file to determine major contributions is a good
>>> idea, but so far that rarely links any new feature to a person
>>> explicitly (GSoC being the most obvious exception). We could
>>> try to do that in future if people feel it would be a good thing in
>>> general.
>>>
>>
>> Considering the extended deadline is close, I'll leave the author line
>> as is for the submission process (minus Joao as requested), since I'd
>> like to check with everyone whether or not they're OK with being
>> included (plus affiliations etc).
>>
>> However, I'll update this as per discussion as we go along.
>>
>> I hope that's acceptable to everyone in the short term!
>>
>> If there are not more comments or improvements, I'll submit the attached
>> abstract in a few hours.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Biopython-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython-dev