search

CompEvol / beast2-site

beast2 web development site
2 stars 6 forks source link

Possibly out of date entry for features #10

Open aezarebski opened 2 years ago

aezarebski commented 2 years ago

While checking to see if epoch models were supported by BEAST2 I see on the features page that they are not.

https://www.beast2.org/features/miscellaneous-epoch-models.html

the relevant line of code in this repository seems to be the following

https://github.com/CompEvol/beast2-site/blob/90745d81f96c772783d1d290947c7913da6e49f4/_features/miscellaneous-epoch-models.md?plain=1#L5

Based on this blog post

https://github.com/CompEvol/beast2-site/blob/90745d81f96c772783d1d290947c7913da6e49f4/_posts/2019-02-25-epoch-models.html#L9

it looks like epoch models are now supported with BEASTLabs.

Could you please update the features table, or if I have misunderstood, could a clarifying comment please be included explaining the current entry?

p.s., just trying to help :) https://github.com/CompEvol/beast2-site/blob/5e516fa841699921170ccbe8f6d0b23949939fd0/_pages/features.html#L8

rbouckaert commented 2 years ago

Thanks @aezarebski for pointing out that the features table is ridiculously out of date. The epoch substitution model indeed exists in BEASTLabs, but there are a lot of other models that are not featured in the table. BEAST has been developing rapidly and we should have a better mechanism for keeping the table current with the latest packages. Perhaps, a better overview is the package overview in CBAN.

rbouckaert commented 2 years ago

Thanks for the updates -- I had a short discussion yesterday with Walter about adding this information to CBAN, perhaps as part of packages2.6.xml or a separate features file. At the time of adding packages to BEAST it seems a good time to clarify features as well. Every time this information is committed the features table can then be updated automatically, which seems more robust than having it updated by hand.

aezarebski commented 2 years ago

No worries, happy to help.

Reading it from the XML sounds like a pretty optimal solution, and I suppose you could use the existing entries to fill in the fields for the existing packages initially. Having the information for analogous features in BEAST1.X sounds like it could be annoying though.

I'll leave this issue for you to close in case you want the thread as a reminder.