[Phylobase-devl] Planning the next release of phylobase
jombart at biomserv.univ-lyon1.fr
Sat Feb 23 13:16:35 CET 2008
Peter Cowan wrote:
>On Feb 22, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Ben Bolker wrote:
>>>2. Automagical subsetting of phylo4d objects.
>>OK, what do you mean by this?
>I mean that if I have a phylo4d object name foo, I should be able to
>do something like foo[-c('taxa1', 'taxa2'), ]. This should probably
>have a bit of discussion about how exactly it should work. I would
>think that using the data frame sub-setting as a models is a good start.
I think both "foo[tips]" and "foo[tips,traits]" could be used. But as a
start, I would prefer "foo[tips]" as this is the less easy to do
manually. Plus, I don't know if both can be implemented, but I'll try
this afternoon if I have time.
>>>3. A final decision on how nodes will be referred to by other
>>>What does everyone think the best way to track and discuss these
>>>issues? Via the mailing list? A chat-room or telephone
>>>conference? Or by the R-forge issue tracker? Personally I'm
>>>interested in giving the tracker a try, it would allow us to claim
>>>tasks and have conversation about particular features/bugs. What
>>>do other people think?
>>Tracker is fine with me for now.
For me too.
>We can have custom categories in the tracker, are there particular
>areas we would like to separate the package into, or should we just
>have a flat list for the time being?
>I will look into getting changes in the tracker forwarded to the
That would be nice. Categories in the tracker could just match those of
the TODO file. On the other hand, we may just give it a try and then see
if categories are actually needed (which I am not sure: is the package
that big already?).
More information about the Phylobase-devl