-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
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
Fixes #69 nanoplot error #70
Conversation
@@ -23,7 +23,6 @@ process NANOPLOT { | |||
|
|||
output: | |||
tuple val(meta), path("*.html"), emit: html | |||
tuple val(meta), path("*.png") , emit: png |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One could also make that one optional ...? with optional: true
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree that optional output might be better, but thats just just a band aid here, so I think its fine.
The optimal solution might be to make NanoPlot output the png again? I mean it was sort of nice to look at them?!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The issue is that static image generation is now dependent on having an internet connection, which cannot always be guaranteed. See: wdecoster/NanoPlot#281
The HTML reports are unaffected so still can visualise the plots. Making the pngs optional could be a pragmatic solution and doesn't cause the workflow to fail on occasions when internet access is unavailable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
No, an internet connection may not be a prerequisite to run the pipeline.
So I am fine with the PR ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree then too!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The failing linting test below is only due to not having the template update 2.2 integrated yet.
LGTM!
Edit: Hm, I am not able to merge the PR due to missing rights it seems (I expect that not everybody can merge it due to the failing linting tests, but I was hoping to use admin power; which I lack obviously, maybe for the better).
I thin this PR is not needed anymore. nf-core template v2.9 has been updated in #86 and Nanoplot has been implemented via nf-core/modules where the *.png requirement has been solved by adding |
Indeed, thanks! |
This PR stops bacass v2.0.0 from failing on the nanoplot step and fixes #69.
The newer version of NanoPlot v1.38.0 doesn't generate png image by default anymore meaning that the NANOPLOT process will always fail as the png output requirement will never be satisfied.
Removing png output requirement in NANPLOT process.
PR checklist
nf-core lint
).nextflow run . -profile test,docker
).docs/usage.md
is updated.docs/output.md
is updated.CHANGELOG.md
is updated.README.md
is updated (including new tool citations and authors/contributors).