rebsearch1.1 - search REBASE with gawk

Don & bashford at scripps.edu
Sun Sep 22 18:09:00 EST 1991

In article <1991Sep22.010222.10961 at ucunix.san.uc.edu> zuazaga at ucunix.san.uc.edu (Humberto Oritz-Zuazaga) writes:

   I think it would be a good idea to have a binaries group, it might even
   encourage the publication of even more quality PD biological software. 

I think it would be much better to have a group for distributing
SOURCES, not binary.  Better from a computing standpoint because
viruses could be detected more easily and porting to other systems
would be possible.  And better scientifically because recipients
would be able to determine exactly what the program does, and 
alter the methodology to suit their needs.  

NOTE: the rebsearch program posted recently to this group *was*
source code, not binaries.  It looked like binary because in was
tarred, compressed and uuencoded.  Perhaps we should prefer shar'ed
postings, at least for things that aren't too big.

   However, I think it should be  a moderated group, lest it get out of
   hand.  The major problem with a moderated group is that biology-related
   software is available for an astonishing number of machines and
   operating system, and so it'll be a headache to see if the software
   indeed works before distributing.

I agree about moderation.  To cut down on moderator headaches there
should also be some guidelines for submission.

Don Bashford
bashford at scripps.edu

More information about the Bio-soft mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net