Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merging the stable version of the pipeline for the first release #1

Merged
merged 49 commits into from
Apr 16, 2024

Conversation

Ales-ibt
Copy link
Collaborator

As this is the first stable version, there are many commits here. The code in Python doesn't need to be intensively reviewed. Thanks in advance for taking a look :D

Copy link

This PR is against the master branch ❌

  • Do not close this PR
  • Click Edit and change the base to dev
  • This CI test will remain failed until you push a new commit

Hi @Ales-ibt,

It looks like this pull-request is has been made against the EBI-Metagenomics/shallowmapping master branch.
The master branch on nf-core repositories should always contain code from the latest release.
Because of this, PRs to master are only allowed if they come from the EBI-Metagenomics/shallowmapping dev branch.

You do not need to close this PR, you can change the target branch to dev by clicking the "Edit" button at the top of this page.
Note that even after this, the test will continue to show as failing until you push a new commit.

Thanks again for your contribution!

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 11, 2024

nf-core lint overall result: Failed ❌

Posted for pipeline commit 7115c89

+| ✅ 116 tests passed       |+
#| ❔  39 tests were ignored |#
!| ❗   5 tests had warnings |!
-| ❌   1 tests failed       |-

❌ Test failures:

❗ Test warnings:

  • files_exist - File not found: .github/workflows/awstest.yml
  • files_exist - File not found: .github/workflows/awsfulltest.yml
  • pipeline_todos - TODO string in ci.yml.bak: You can customise CI pipeline run tests as required
  • pipeline_todos - TODO string in WorkflowMain.groovy: Add Zenodo DOI for pipeline after first release
  • pipeline_todos - TODO string in WorkflowShallowmapping.groovy: Optionally add in-text citation tools to this list.

❔ Tests ignored:

  • files_exist - File is ignored: CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: assets/nf-core-shallowmapping_logo_light.png
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/output.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/README.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/README.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/usage.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/images/nf-core-shallowmapping_logo_dark.png
  • files_exist - File is ignored: docs/images/nf-core-shallowmapping_logo_light.png
  • files_exist - File is ignored: pyproject.toml
  • files_exist - File is ignored: .gitignore
  • files_exist - File is ignored: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml
  • files_exist - File is ignored: .github/workflows/*
  • files_exist - File is ignored: .github/CONTRIBUTING.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
  • files_exist - File is ignored: conf/igenomes.config
  • files_exist - File is ignored: conf/igenomes.config
  • files_exist - File is ignored: conf/test.config
  • files_exist - File is ignored: conf/test_full.config
  • files_exist - File is ignored: .github/workflows/ci.yml
  • files_exist - File is ignored: lib/Utils.groovy
  • files_exist - File is ignored: lib/WorkflowMain.groovy
  • files_exist - File is ignored: lib/NfcoreTemplate.groovy
  • files_exist - File is ignored: lib/WorkflowShallowmapping.groovy
  • files_exist - File is ignored: lib/nfcore_external_java_deps.jar
  • nextflow_config - Config variable ignored: manifest.name
  • nextflow_config - Config variable ignored: manifest.homePage
  • nextflow_config - Config variable ignored: process.cpus
  • nextflow_config - Config variable ignored: process.memory
  • nextflow_config - Config variable ignored: process.time
  • files_unchanged - File ignored due to lint config: CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
  • files_unchanged - File ignored due to lint config: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
  • files_unchanged - File does not exist: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml
  • files_unchanged - File ignored due to lint config: assets/nf-core-shallowmapping_logo_light.png
  • files_unchanged - File does not exist: docs/images/nf-core-shallowmapping_logo_light.png
  • files_unchanged - File does not exist: docs/images/nf-core-shallowmapping_logo_dark.png
  • files_unchanged - File does not exist: docs/README.md
  • actions_ci - '.github/workflows/ci.yml' not found
  • actions_awstest - 'awstest.yml' workflow not found: /home/runner/work/shallowmapping/shallowmapping/.github/workflows/awstest.yml

✅ Tests passed:

Run details

  • nf-core/tools version 2.13.1
  • Run at 2024-04-16 09:33:05

Copy link

@vagkaratzas vagkaratzas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll start dropping some comments here and there as I go deeper in the pipeline. It would be awesome if you could revive the conf/test.config and put all default parameter values needed to run a minimal end-to-end test. I can understand that this may be a bit hard due to required databases, but maybe you can even let it run through an end-to-end stub test instead of subsampling and/or linking smaller versions of the dbs. It's much much easier to follow the execution to debug it with the default nextflow output rather than with nf-test.

In any case, either if you choose to do this, or stick with nf-test test, it would be nice if there was some guidance on how to run the test in the READme. For example, for the nf-test, write how much cpu and mem are required and the command to run.

Copy link

@vagkaratzas vagkaratzas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove --genome GRCh37 from line 24 in main.nf. Replace this line with the minimal one required to run the pipeline

@vagkaratzas
Copy link

vagkaratzas commented Apr 15, 2024

I'll start dropping some comments here and there as I go deeper in the pipeline. It would be awesome if you could revive the conf/test.config and put all default parameter values needed to run a minimal end-to-end test. I can understand that this may be a bit hard due to required databases, but maybe you can even let it run through an end-to-end stub test instead of subsampling and/or linking smaller versions of the dbs. It's much much easier to follow the execution to debug it with the default nextflow output rather than with nf-test.

In any case, either if you choose to do this, or stick with nf-test test, it would be nice if there was some guidance on how to run the test in the READme. For example, for the nf-test, write how much cpu and mem are required and the command to run.

I think 12 CPUs and 72GB memory for current nf-test.

@vagkaratzas vagkaratzas reopened this Apr 15, 2024
@Ales-ibt
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I'll start dropping some comments here and there as I go deeper in the pipeline. It would be awesome if you could revive the conf/test.config and put all default parameter values needed to run a minimal end-to-end test. I can understand that this may be a bit hard due to required databases, but maybe you can even let it run through an end-to-end stub test instead of subsampling and/or linking smaller versions of the dbs. It's much much easier to follow the execution to debug it with the default nextflow output rather than with nf-test.

In any case, either if you choose to do this, or stick with nf-test test, it would be nice if there was some guidance on how to run the test in the READme. For example, for the nf-test, write how much cpu and mem are required and the command to run.

I agree, but the nf-test we run is for development use as it runs only using the ebi profile in codon due to the databases issue. External users can test their installation and databases paths by running the pipeline with the provided test data. Even if they have no hits with the biome they are interested, the pipeline should finish successfully. I have added that to the README file.

@Ales-ibt Ales-ibt requested a review from vagkaratzas April 16, 2024 09:32
Copy link

@vagkaratzas vagkaratzas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, at least the parts I checked seem to be working fine ;)

@Ales-ibt
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thank you for your review @vagkaratzas. I will merge now.

@Ales-ibt Ales-ibt merged commit bc33f93 into master Apr 16, 2024
9 of 12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants