Difference between revisions of "Talk:GBrowse syn"

From GMOD
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: == Upcoming Hackathon (7/11/2010) == Here are some ideas for things to work on w.r.t GBsyn dev. etc. === User interface === * The tracks don't 'feel' like GB 2.0 tracks, and are describ...)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
 
== Upcoming Hackathon (7/11/2010) ==
 
== Upcoming Hackathon (7/11/2010) ==
  
Line 6: Line 5:
 
=== User interface ===
 
=== User interface ===
 
* The tracks don't 'feel' like GB 2.0 tracks, and are described in the manual as 'gbrowse-like'. Why can't we have proper GBrowse tracks? Wouldn't this allow a lot of code to be refactored?
 
* The tracks don't 'feel' like GB 2.0 tracks, and are described in the manual as 'gbrowse-like'. Why can't we have proper GBrowse tracks? Wouldn't this allow a lot of code to be refactored?
 
+
* I'd like to use my existing track configuration to configure tracks in GBsyn. Additional options could be added to the GBsyn conf to turn tracks off, because its a pain to reconfigure them all from scratch again (especially using GBrowse 1.7 syntax) for GBsyn.
  
 
=== Behind the scenes ===
 
=== Behind the scenes ===
 
* Oh, also, could you go ahead and make GBrowse_syn run under fastcgi?  kthxbai
 
* Oh, also, could you go ahead and make GBrowse_syn run under fastcgi?  kthxbai

Revision as of 15:47, 4 November 2010

Upcoming Hackathon (7/11/2010)

Here are some ideas for things to work on w.r.t GBsyn dev. etc.

User interface

  • The tracks don't 'feel' like GB 2.0 tracks, and are described in the manual as 'gbrowse-like'. Why can't we have proper GBrowse tracks? Wouldn't this allow a lot of code to be refactored?
  • I'd like to use my existing track configuration to configure tracks in GBsyn. Additional options could be added to the GBsyn conf to turn tracks off, because its a pain to reconfigure them all from scratch again (especially using GBrowse 1.7 syntax) for GBsyn.

Behind the scenes

  • Oh, also, could you go ahead and make GBrowse_syn run under fastcgi? kthxbai