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

fix: fix somatic snappy (#477) #491

Merged
merged 29 commits into from
Mar 20, 2024
Merged

fix: fix somatic snappy (#477) #491

merged 29 commits into from
Mar 20, 2024

Conversation

ericblanc20
Copy link
Contributor

The dreaded mega-PR is there!

It fixes most of the known snappy issues for the somatic branch.
There are a few glitches left with log files (that are in work, but not in output for example), but a generic fix would be warranted (rather than a lot of fixes in each wrapper).

Documentation is also improved (or at least completed): a somatic overview is there, and some steps are more clearly described. But again, there is still much to do.

ericblanc20 and others added 26 commits February 1, 2024 14:06
…BFilter and those which aren't, and removed parallelization of EBFilter
@ericblanc20 ericblanc20 requested a review from mbenary March 13, 2024 17:26
Copy link

  • Please format your Python code with black: make black
  • Please format your Snakemake code with snakefmt: make snakefmt
  • Please organize your imports isorts: make isort
  • Please ensure that your code passes flake8: make flake8

You can trigger all lints locally by running make lint

@ericblanc20 ericblanc20 changed the title 477 fix somatic snappy fix: fix somatic snappy (#477) Mar 14, 2024
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 14, 2024

Coverage Status

coverage: 85.742% (+0.01%) from 85.728%
when pulling ed3a744 on 477-fix-somatic-snappy
into fab3e36 on main.

Copy link
Contributor

@mbenary mbenary left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a few typos, but otherwise good.

Somatic variant calling is implemented differently for exome and whole genome data.

The whole genome data "branch" is currently under review, as GRCh38 support in ``Control-FREEC`` (the main workhorse for WGS CNV calling) is not complete.
CNV calling in WGS data can aslo be done using ``cnvkit``, but its pipeline implementation is also incomplete.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

typo in "can also be done"

for i, t in ((1, 1), (2, 1), (2, 2))
for ext in ("log", "conda_list.txt", "conda_info.txt")
for chksum in ("", ".md5")
for mapper in ("bwa",)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is "mapper" actually used? There is no {mapper} in tpl .

.. note::

The step requires a ``cancer_matched`` configuration & samplesheet files.
This is an unnecessary requirement, as might be dropped in the future.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Typo: "as might" ... better "which might"

pattern: "V5_noUTR"
path: <absolute path to the Agilent V5 bed file>
- name: Agilent SureSelect V5 + UTRs"
patten: "V5_UTR"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Typo: "patten" vs "pattern"

@ericblanc20 ericblanc20 merged commit af961cc into main Mar 20, 2024
6 checks passed
@ericblanc20 ericblanc20 deleted the 477-fix-somatic-snappy branch March 20, 2024 12:17
@tedil tedil mentioned this pull request Jun 28, 2024
This was referenced Dec 9, 2024
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