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

Migrate Remapping nextflow pipeline to DSL2 #9

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 20, 2023

Conversation

tcezard
Copy link
Member

@tcezard tcezard commented Dec 20, 2023

Switch to DSL2

Copy link
Collaborator

@apriltuesday apriltuesday left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, just a couple tiny things.

eva_assembly_ingestion/nextflow/remap_cluster.nf Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
eva_assembly_ingestion/nextflow/remap_cluster.nf Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
"""
}


process retrieve_target_genome {

input:
each target_assembly_accession
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be val instead of each? I'm not sure it makes a difference in practice, but semantically there should only ever be one target.

update_source_genome(params.source_assembly_accession, retrieve_source_genome.out.source_fasta,
retrieve_source_genome.out.source_report, params.remapping_config)
update_target_genome(retrieve_target_genome.out.target_fasta, retrieve_target_genome.out.target_report, params.remapping_config)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've realised we might be able to reduce some duplicated code between some of these processes now that we're passing in source & target assembly accessions... can happen later though.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree. We also had a discussion about removing the custom assembly on the target and keeping it only in the source but I didn't want to drag this ticket out.

process_remapped_variants.out.rs_report_filename
.concat(cluster_unclustered_variants.out.rs_report_filename)
.set{ rs_reports }
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a good idea!

@tcezard tcezard merged commit 8eb8012 into EBIvariation:main Dec 20, 2023
4 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.

2 participants