-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
Workflow genome selection inconsistent with few bugs: fixed vs runtime #1132
Comments
Related #979 |
@jennaj Thanks a lot for all the details and screenshots. I have tried to answer all questions:
Thanks again. |
Thanks Sam. I think we are in the same place. Plus I can clarify a bit. When I say make a ticket - that is my suggestion. If we all think that the SAMtools suite should be different, then that is something we can decide. It has usage implications that our community has already run into. And will more often with the generic workflow modeling (migration to open source shared workflow repos). (github ticket is a placeholder for those we decide to actually create then link back here)
Yes, but I think that we should consider turning that off for this tool set. No genome filtering based on inputs. Why? If this tool is included it freezes the workflow to a specific genome, unless one has edit permissions and want to change the workflow itself. As before, and a biggie, Galaxy is now being abstracted with other workflow engines. Plus, most of our other tools allow genome selected/modification at run-time. (except when it is not working - the editor AND the run-time form indicate that genome selection can be made in either for certain tools, like Tophat - which is why I included it as an comparision example). Does that makes sense? This could mean a github ticket.
It doesn't for this tool set, but it does for Tophat. This tool should be like the other. Actually, all tools that have a genome selection function should have this be the same (including the part about using a genome from the history - within the editor - that was in another observation I made). This is probably the same github issue as for 1)
I agree - github issue. Might be the same as 1) and 2). In effect, make the ref genome selection just like Tophat and most other tools. From a list of indexed genomes, same as if using it in the history (and without any filtering by inputs). Workflows are not always created from histories and we should support the design of workflows that have as few hard-set parameters as possible. Ref genome is a biggie to have hard-set. Prevents a ton of valid/common use cases.
OK, so once Tophat is functional again we can use it as a model for other tools (again, this is why I picked it to compare to, but in the process uncovered the issues with it). I didn't look specifically to see which tools have this ref genome selection fully implimented. But the Samtools suite needs to. Rest should be examined (are probably just a few or few suites). Could be a master github ticket for all tools that need an update (as a check list) then pull-requests are attached as done?
Ok, this is a smaller change. I'll submit it as a enhancement github ticket
We can test this once the new version is on main, see if it still a bug, and needs a github issue
It is related to #979. That one is a third style of genome selection in the editor and run-time function (as well as the tool form, but that is a style issue unrelated to function. I consider style secondary - I have only asked for functional consistency in the above - and 979 is also about functionality). Although certainly using the same style in all tools (at least those we can change) is a big win. Maybe it needs to be moved out to a distinct function then called by tools (?). Or maybe it is and just not all tools use it (yet?). Thanks for the great comments and help. I know this is a monster ticket. It is just the more I looked at a way to solve a user's problem with samtools for a workflow a nest of other issues popped out. I'll wait for final feedback then make the tickets. Linking back here because I am SURE none of us want to go through the concepts in painful detail again, ha :) |
I am not sure if the following is of any help, but maybe it is so I'll post it. When I had a similar problem I fixed this at the tool side as follows (https://github.com/ErasmusMC-Bioinformatics/featurecounts_galaxy_wrapper/blob/master/featurecounts/featurecounts.xml): instead of using 2 selects:
I added an extra select that is designed for running in workflows:
When a tool gets executed, the last option (
|
Thanks @yhoogstrate ! The concept seems intersting to me, but let's see what @guerler and others think. Seem like it would be very useful to include enhanced genome select options, specifcally for workflow use, in such core tools. |
Few issues, some are tool related, but might be global.
Example tools: Tophat2 and SAM-to-BAM
Impact:
Detail Tophat2:
Detail BAM-to-SAM:
Graphics demonstrating behavior:
Workflow Editor
Workflow Submission
Workflow View
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: