If you choose to introduce a second package, I would suggest immediately 
deprecating MoonlightR. The two versions co-exist for a development and release 
cycle for comparison / opportunity for users to adjust, and then there is only 
MoonlightR2.

This avoids confusion for new users. You can focus development & support 
efforts on the new version. Users wishing to compare results can use the 
version of R / Bioconductor where both packages were available. Users wishing 
to rigorously reproduce previous results are in the unenviable position of 
re-creating an R environment from the original analysis; they do not benefit 
from having MoonlightR available in the current (i.e., different) R / 
Bioconductor.

The transition from DESeq to DESeq2 was very protracted, and �at the end� there 
were still new users starting with the very outdated DESeq, and still requests 
to support DESeq that were no longer relevant.

Martin

From: Bioc-devel <bioc-devel-boun...@r-project.org> on behalf of Matteo Tiberti 
<tibe...@cancer.dk>
Date: Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 6:54 AM
To: Kevin Coombes <kevin.r.coom...@gmail.com>, Herv� Pag�s 
<hpages.on.git...@gmail.com>
Cc: bioc-devel@r-project.org <bioc-devel@r-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Bioc-devel] name for new BioC package
Dear all,

thanks for your input

just to answer on your different points:

@Kevin Coombes<mailto:kevin.r.coom...@gmail.com> I agree it can be annoying - 
we don't intend to heavily change the API, we mostly want to add functionality 
and refactoring some of the internals (including basic information that the 
package uses), which means results of Moonlight2R will be significantly 
different from MoonlightR

@Laurent, I think we will eventually deprecate MoonlightR but we would prefer 
having both of them on Bioconductor for now, as e.g. it makes it easier to run 
comparisons which are reproducible without too much pain

@Herv� Pag�s<mailto:hpages.on.git...@gmail.com> thanks a lot! I think we will 
keep the name with 2 for now

Best regards,


Matteo Tiberti

Danish Cancer Society
Strandboulevarden 49
DK-2100 Copenhagen
Telefon: +45 35 25 73 07


[cid:14bd0b1b-c32e-460e-bd97-b434f126f8c5]<https://www.cancer.dk/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=medarbejderemail&utm_campaign=medarbejderemail&utm_content=cancerdk>

www.cancer.dk<https://www.cancer.dk/international/> | Vores 
privatlivspolitik<https://www.cancer.dk/om-os/privatlivspolitik/>

________________________________
From: Kevin Coombes <kevin.r.coom...@gmail.com>
Sent: 04 February 2023 14:26
To: Herv� Pag�s <hpages.on.git...@gmail.com>
Cc: Matteo Tiberti <tibe...@cancer.dk>; bioc-devel@r-project.org 
<bioc-devel@r-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Bioc-devel] name for new BioC package

For the record, as a user, I  *hated* the move from MOFA to MOFA2. Not the new 
package name, but the fact that they also Schanged all the function names and 
argument names. Mostly, they switched from using periods to underscores. But 
this meant having to tediously hand-edit every script that used MOFA in order 
to continue using that script in newer versions of R (since they also 
discontinued supporting the MOFA package in newer versions). Also, some of the 
changes produced less useful graphical summaries, to the extent that I took the 
time to write my own code to reproduce the original versions.

So, I would suggest that you at least think about how much work you are 
creating for your established users before making the change. And make choices 
that minimize the burden you are imposing on them.

Best,
  Kevin

On Sat, Feb 4, 2023, 1:03 AM Herv� Pag�s 
<hpages.on.git...@gmail.com<mailto:hpages.on.git...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Matteo.

We had DESeq2 after DESeq, Rbowtie2 after Rbowtie, MOFA2 after MOFA,
etc.. so I don't see any problem, but thanks for asking!

Best,

H.

On 03/02/2023 00:08, Matteo Tiberti wrote:
> dear maintainers,
>
> I am currently listed as maintainer of Bioconductor package MoonlightR, 
> designed for the prediction of cancer driver genes, which implements the 
> Moonlight workflow.
>
> We are currently working on a second version of our workflow, called 
> Moonlight2, and would like to have it released on Bioconductor as well, in 
> form of the Moonlight2R package. The new package uses similar principles as 
> the current one, but will have significant changes and updates, both in terms 
> of new functionality and revision of old functionalities. The Moonlight2R 
> project/paper will also have in part a different corresponding authorship 
> respect to the current one. MoonlightR and Moonlight2R currently reside in 
> two separate GitHub repositories.
>
> Ideally we would like to have both packages on BioConductor for the moment, 
> the old one (called MoonlightR) and the new one that we intend to submit 
> before the April cut-off for 3.17 (called Moonlight2R), where the number 
> signifies the version of the protocol rather than the software. However on 
> the package submission list, I see that having package names that "imply a 
> temporal relationship" respect to an existing package is discouraged. Given 
> the circumstances, do you think it would be possible to use the Moonlight2R 
> name for the package (i.e. would it be a reason for rejection or object of 
> revision during submission) or is it fair to keep it as is?
>
> Many thanks
>
> Matteo Tiberti
>
> Danish Cancer Society Research Center
> Strandboulevarden 49
> DK-2100 Copenhagen
> Telephone: +45 35 25 73 07
>
>
> [https://i.xink.io/Images/Get/K116/d1.png<https://i.xink.io/Images/Get/K116/d1.png>]<https://www.cancer.dk/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=medarbejderemail&utm_campaign=medarbejderemail&utm_content=cancerdk<https://i.xink.io/Images/Get/K116/d1.png%3chttps:/i.xink.io/Images/Get/K116/d1.png%3e%5d%3chttps:/www.cancer.dk/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=medarbejderemail&utm_campaign=medarbejderemail&utm_content=cancerdk>>
>
> www.cancer.dk<http://www.cancer.dk><https://www.cancer.dk/international/<http://www.cancer.dk%3e%3chttps:/www.cancer.dk/international/>>
>  | Vores privatlivspolitik<https://www.cancer.dk/om-os/privatlivspolitik/>
>
>
>       [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioc-devel@r-project.org<mailto:Bioc-devel@r-project.org> mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel><https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel%3chttps:/stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel%3e>

--
Herv� Pag�s

Bioconductor Core Team
hpages.on.git...@gmail.com<mailto:hpages.on.git...@gmail.com>

_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org<mailto:Bioc-devel@r-project.org> mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel<https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel><https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel%3chttps:/stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel%3e>
_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel

Reply via email to