Skip to content

Conversation

@JackCurragh
Copy link
Contributor

add RiboCode for calling translated regions. - #132

  • Add RiboCode modules (gtfupdate, prepare, metaplots, ribocode)
  • Integrate 4-step RiboCode workflow in workflows/riboseq/main.nf
  • Update documentation and schema
  • Skip RiboCode in basic tests (like Ribotricer)

Running test_full currently

PR checklist

  • This comment contains a description of changes (with reason).
  • If you've fixed a bug or added code that should be tested, add tests!
  • If you've added a new tool - have you followed the pipeline conventions in the contribution docs
  • If necessary, also make a PR on the nf-core/riboseq branch on the nf-core/test-datasets repository.
  • Make sure your code lints (nf-core pipelines lint).
  • Ensure the test suite passes (nextflow run . -profile test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>).
  • Check for unexpected warnings in debug mode (nextflow run . -profile debug,test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>).
  • Usage Documentation in docs/usage.md is updated.
  • Output Documentation in docs/output.md is updated.
  • CHANGELOG.md is updated.
  • README.md is updated (including new tool citations and authors/contributors).

saveAs: { filename -> filename.equals('versions.yml') ? null : filename }
],
[
path: { "${params.outdir}/riboseq_qc/ribocode" },
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You could probably use some wildcards to condense the publishing logic

ch_versions = ch_versions.mix(RIBOTRICER_DETECTORFS.out.versions)
}

if (!params.skip_ribocode){
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we want to do it this way, or have it so that only this OR ribotricer is run? Will folks commonly want both?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No tool is very reliable at this task so it is increasingly common to run multiple tools. Maybe down the line if more tools are added we'd add one or two local modules to homogenise the outputs

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