Re: [Biopython] Biopython 1.75 plans

The release is in hand - no one has spoken up in support of keeping
the epydoc API documentation, and since it was so painful to get that
working this time (my default Python is Python 3 nowadays), I'll be
happy to see the end of it.

http://biopython.org/DIST/docs/api/ <-- old, epydoc
https://biopython.org/docs/1.75/api/ <-- new, Sphinx

Currently waiting for the wheels to build, fingers crossed that goes
smoothly.

Peter

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 5:17 PM Peter Cock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Those are all done now, so I hope to do the release of
> Biopython 1.75 tomorrow (Wednesday) or Friday this week.
>
> Peter
>
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 11:10 AM Peter Cock <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The PR from Markus was merged, Michiel and I would like to
> > include https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2297 and
> > https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2306 respectively.
> >
> > Also, I would appreciate independent eyes on the following BSD
> > dual licensing pull requests, to check no past contributors have
> > been overlooked:
> >
> > https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2242
> > https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2244
> > https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2248
> > https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2250
> >
> > Any volunteers?
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 4:41 PM Markus Piotrowski
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Peter,
> > >
> > > I'd appreciate if we can consider PR #2096
> > > (https://github.com/biopython/biopython/pull/2096) for 1.75.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Markus
> > >
> > > Am 27.09.2019 um 17:13 schrieb Peter Cock:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > > > We've got more than enough new features and bug fixes to justify
> > > > doing the Biopython 1.75 release - hopefully early October 2019?
> > > >
> > > > (We might then do a follow up late October or in November if it
> > > > turns out we need to fix something for Python 3.8 to work.)
> > > >
> > > > Do people have any issues/pull requests they're working on or
> > > > especially need to be included?
> > > >
> > > > Do people think we should once again use epydoc for the API
> > > > documentation:
> > > >
> > > > https://biopython.org/DIST/docs/api/
> > > >
> > > > Or, is the new largely automated Sphinx approach good enough?
> > > >
> > > > https://biopython.org/docs/1.74/api/
> > > > https://biopython.org/docs/dev/api/
> > > >
> > > > There are some specific issues noted here:
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/906
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Peter
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Biopython mailing list  -  [email protected]
> > > > https://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython
> > >
> > > --
> > > _________________________________
> > > Dr. Markus Piotrowski
> > > Privatdozent/Akademischer Rat
> > > Lehrstuhl für Molekulare Genetik und Physiologie der Pflanzen
> > > ND 3/49
> > > Universitätsstr. 150
> > > 44801 Bochum
> > >
> > > Tel. xx49-(0)234-3224290
> > > Fax. xx49-(0)234-3214187
> > >
> > > http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/pflaphy/Seiten_dt/PG_Piotrowski_d.html
> > > http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Markus.Piotrowski/Index.html
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Biopython mailing list  -  [email protected]
> > > https://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython

_______________________________________________
Biopython mailing list  -  [email protected]
https://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython