Add parameter to exclude unbinned data from post-binning steps

[dialvarezs]

This pr adds a new parameter exclude_unbins_from_postbinning, with default value false.
The reasoning behind this is that as stated in #649, Prokka can take a really long time with unbinned data, and also qc metrics and taxonomic classification normally are not meaningful for non-bins.
With the default set to false, this parameter doesn't introduce any breaking change to the current workflow, but adds flexibility to focus on binned data on post-binning steps.

This PR also fixes one minor issue I found in line 827 of mag.nf, where the channel passed to GUNC was ch_input_bins_for_qc instead of ch_input_bins_for_gunc (the same, but without eukarya domain).

Closes #649 .

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/mag 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).

[jfy133]

This is a great idea!

I've tweaked the phrasing of the parameter and given more guidance to the parameter name.

Please update the CHANGELOG and I think then we might be good to go.

The only thing check is that the bin_summary steps don't fail for some reason because some contigs are missing for some reason

[dialvarezs]

Thank you for the review! I believe everything should be good to go now.

As for a possible bin summary failure, I don’t think it will case issues, because DEPTHS and every other bin summary input uses the same channel. I did a test with a few samples and didn't have any problem.

On that note, I think it should be worth considering making bin summary more flexible, allowing it to handle cases where not all inputs have identical bins. So, if a QC bin fails, we could generate the table with a warning rather than an error. This should prevent issues like #603, but obviously, if a QC process fails the user should have to look into it. However, this could be a discussion to have in another PR.

[jfy133]

Thank you very much @dialvarezs !