*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
Dear all,
May I suggest to indeed leave things as they are - not split the bb -
but then have two 'silent' agreements, which are anyway partially in
place.
a. To restrain - not constrain - a bit towards the protein handling and
biochemistry, and attempt to stay out of cloning issues, whenever
possible and unless its really needed, and when i.e. google 'ligation
problems' does not give a satisfactory answer.
b. When questions (which must indeed have proper subjects, as they
mostly do!) are upstream of crystallization, to send the answers to the
person that asked, and not to everybody. Then the person that asked
should post one simple summary for update.
Tassos
On 4 Nov 2005, at 12:44, Garib Murshudov wrote:
*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
I also think that it is important to keep as it is. And that is what
makes it popular. Everybody finds something useful. I agree with
Martyn's
point that subject should be sufficiently clear.
Garib
On 4 Nov 2005, at 13:12, George M. Sheldrick wrote:
*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
I vote for keeping a single CCP4bb list. I don't understand all the
biological stuff but some of the contributions are quite educational.
George
Martyn Winn wrote:
Hmmm, I thought this suggestion would come up sooner
or later.
My understanding is that the value people get out
of ccp4bb is that their questions reach the whole
community. Splitting up ccp4bb will dilute that
benefit.
We will never get a service that everyone likes,
but my feeling is that most people are happy most
of the time.
--
Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS
Dept. Structural Chemistry,
University of Goettingen,
Tammannstr. 4,
D37077 Goettingen, Germany
Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068
Fax. +49-551-39-2582
