[Go] diff still being done on the '_edit' file

[Chris Mungall]

For the short term I would say we encourage people to use the date as  
a version; they get this anyway if they download a database-derived  
file.

This isn't ideal though

John wrote this proposal:
http://wiki.geneontology.org/index.php/OBO-Edit:_Versioning_Proposal
but it is rather complex

Fortunately, now we have a true division between the editors copy of  
the file (which is potentially edited asynchronously, making  
versioning difficult) and the public's copy we can finally think  
about proper versioning of content.

As part of the publishing step (copying from editors/ 
gene_ontology_write.obo) we can increment a centrally stored version  
(or just use the date..).

We can thrash out the details at SLC


On Apr 11, 2008, at 3:38 PM, Mike Cherry wrote:

> How should we, and our users, refer to the version of the content?
>
> In the current headers we have a date and a cvs revision number.   
> Seems that until we provide a "true" content version the cvs  
> revision number is  the content version.  Its all we have right now.
>
> I'm actually not sure what would be used to differentiate one  
> content version from another.  Would it be a sequence of numbers  
> that would advance whenever the cvs revision increments.  If not,  
> when would the content version number advance?
>
> Changing the header would be better done after we can add a content  
> versioning system.  I'd guess that changing the text on the  
> revision line will screw up scripts, I know if would for me, so we  
> could give some warning of that change.
>
> -Mike
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Chris Mungall wrote:
>>
>> I think we also need to discourage referencing these as "version  
>> numbers" - they are cvs revision numbers and file specific, not  
>> content specific
>>
>> The header says:
>> remark: cvs version: $Revision: 1.9 $
>>
>> Perhaps we should change it to something like:
>> remark: file revision number $Revision: 1.9 $ -- does not refer to  
>> contents
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:35 AM, Mike Cherry wrote:
>>
>>> Karen,
>>>
>>> The gene_ontology_edit.obo and the gene_ontology_write.obo are
>>> identical.    However, its a good point about the version  
>>> numbers.  I
>>> just changed the script so the gene_ontology_write.obo file is  
>>> now used.
>>>
>>> -Mike
>>>
>>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Karen Christie wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Not anything urgent, but I notice that the diff is still being
>>>> performed
>>>> on the gene_ontology_edit.obo file.
>>>>
>>>> While I'm sure that the diff itself is just fine, it would be much
>>>> more
>>>> useful to editors if the diff was done on the '_write' file so that
>>>> one
>>>> can correlate the version numbers diffed to the log file that  
>>>> contains
>>>> meaningful information.
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise, if this diff is meant primarily for users, then there's
>>>> still
>>>> probably a better choice for the source file than the current one.
>>>>
>>>> -Karen
>>>>
>>>>>> To: go-diff at genome.stanford.edu
>>>>>> Subject: [Go-diff] GO update 04/10/2008
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OBODIFF of gene_ontology_edit.obo version 5.754 by 5.755
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Go mailing list
>>>> Go at geneontology.org
>>>> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/go
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Go mailing list
>>> Go at geneontology.org
>>> http://fafner.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/go
>>>
>
>