 |
 |
Dear Mark, I definitely have interest in contributing to Analysis. I was kind of forced to use it because the rest of the group I joined was already using it. Before I used XEASY and then Sparky. In the beginning Analysis seemed quite clumsy, but after a course given by Chris Spronk some things became even attractive. Although there are still a few things missing that were available in Sparky. After talking to Rasmus Fogh I started to appreciate the software which is being maintained, and to which an end user can actually contribute. At the moment I just use Analysis for simple things like viewing HSQCs, but will start the bigger project (like complete assignment) in a few days. So, I guess it is the right time for me to comment on the things I like/dislike in Analysis. Would it sound interesting, please contact me for further details. Kind regards, Nadezda (Nadia) Kovalevskaya Postdoc at the Department of Protein Biophysics (Geerten Vuister's group) Institute for Molecules and Materials, Radboud University Nijmegen The Netherlands [log in to unmask] 2010/12/7 Mark Howard <[log in to unmask]>: > Dear User, > > > > The CCPN Executive Committee has set new priorities for CCPN in the coming > year having taken into consideration feedback from users and the Scientific > Advisory Board. We consider it essential that CCPN should produce a new > Analysis version by autumn or winter 2011. > > > > The new version should be: > > > > - More streamlined and intuitive to use > > - Easier for new users to get up-and-running > > - At least as capable as the current version > > - Familiar to existing users > > - Less cluttered and more automatic > > - Faster and nicer looking > > - Well integrated with external programs for assignment, structure > > generation and validation, mainly through the WeNMR project > > - Linked to a workflow and project tracking system > > > > In order to have time for this effort, the CCPN programming team must reduce > its time spent on other activities to an absolute minimum. This means adding > no new features and encouraging work-around options to complicated bug > fixes. They will honour any prearranged courses and workshops but no > further commitment in this area is possible until after the next release. > > > > This change in emphasis is important for the future of CCPN Analysis and the > new 2011 version of the software will benefit the whole NMR community. Your > co-operation in allowing the programmers fulfil this task is appreciated, > together with your continual support for the project. > > > > If you are interested in being an alpha tester for the new Analysis, and are > willing to do a certain amount of supportive work, please let me know. We > are especially interested in people with little or no Analysis experience > and those who have worked primarily with competitor packages such as Sparky > or NMRView. > > > > Please contact me if you have any questions. > > > > Regards > > > > Mark Howard > > > > Chair, CCPN Executive Committee. > > > > ================================================ > > Dr. Mark J. Howard CSci CChem MRSC > > Senior Lecturer in Biomolecular NMR Spectroscopy > > School of Biosciences > > University of Kent > > Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NJ, UK. > > ================================================ > >