Skip to content

Conversation

@maxulysse
Copy link
Member

@maxulysse maxulysse commented Aug 14, 2025

Replaces fully #1911
Overlaps a bit with #1912

Splitting this beast in:

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/sarek 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).

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 14, 2025

nf-core pipelines lint overall result: Passed ✅ ⚠️

Posted for pipeline commit b650b6c

+| ✅ 228 tests passed       |+
#| ❔  10 tests were ignored |#
!| ❗   3 tests had warnings |!
Details

❗ Test warnings:

  • pipeline_todos - TODO string in main.nf: Optionally add in-text citation tools to this list.
  • pipeline_todos - TODO string in main.nf: Optionally add bibliographic entries to this list.
  • pipeline_todos - TODO string in main.nf: Only uncomment below if logic in toolCitationText/toolBibliographyText has been filled!

❔ Tests ignored:

✅ Tests passed:

Run details

  • nf-core/tools version 3.3.2
  • Run at 2025-08-22 06:33:21

@maxulysse
Copy link
Member Author

tests warnings: 258 -> 129

@maxulysse maxulysse changed the title Fix warning nf corelint WIP: Fix warning nf corelint Aug 14, 2025
@maxulysse maxulysse force-pushed the fix_warning_nf-corelint branch from dad9403 to c535870 Compare August 18, 2025 10:20
@maxulysse
Copy link
Member Author

solving conflicts locally, as there's a complex snapshot merge conflict involved

@maxulysse maxulysse changed the title WIP: Fix warning nf corelint WIP: Fix warning nf core lint and nextflow lint Aug 20, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@famosab famosab left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A few general points:

  • does not need to be fixed here but I think we should be more consistent in the code commenting (stuff like channel: [...])
  • I am not a fan of just adding a _ after the name like bam_ to suppress the warning. I would go for something more descriptive like bam_file or change the channel name to ch_bam to get rid of the warning.
  • I noticed some changes in the snaps that I did not expect (like more processes being run), maybe we can address those? (I did not comment where I just saw that versions were being recovered :)

Note:

  • I did not review the nf-core modules, will check for the versions though after submitting this review.

Comment on lines +147 to +148
- [1955](https://github.com/nf-core/sarek/pull/1955) - Fix nf-core/tools lint Pipeline Test Warnings
- [1955](https://github.com/nf-core/sarek/pull/1955) - Fix nf-core/tools lint Subworkflow Test Warnings
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why do you split this here in the Changelog?

Suggested change
- [1955](https://github.com/nf-core/sarek/pull/1955) - Fix nf-core/tools lint Pipeline Test Warnings
- [1955](https://github.com/nf-core/sarek/pull/1955) - Fix nf-core/tools lint Subworkflow Test Warnings
- [1955](https://github.com/nf-core/sarek/pull/1955) - Fix nf-core/tools lint Pipeline and Subworkflow Test Warnings

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note to myself to check this in the end again

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we have nf-test tests for the local modules or do we not do that because they are quite simple? Just wondering.

Comment on lines +60 to +61
touch ${meta.id}.reindex.bam
touch ${meta.id}.reindex.bam.bai
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No prefix needed?

Comment on lines +168 to +169
genotype_index // channel: [ val(meta), [ tbi ] ]
genotype_vcf // channel: [ val(meta), [ vcf ] ]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
genotype_index // channel: [ val(meta), [ tbi ] ]
genotype_vcf // channel: [ val(meta), [ vcf ] ]
genotype_index // channel: [ meta, tbi ]
genotype_vcf // channel: [ meta, vcf ]

or are these multiple vcfs / tbis?

"-profile test --input tests/csv/3.0/mapped_single_bam.csv --step markduplicates --skip_tools markduplicates --tools false": {
"content": [
9,
12,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

3 more, on purpose?

"-profile test --input tests/csv/3.0/mapped_single_bam.csv --step prepare_recalibration --tools false": {
"content": [
7,
10,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

3 more, on purpose?

Comment on lines +15 to +23
"INDEX_CRAM": {
"samtools": 1.21
},
"MOSDEPTH": {
"mosdepth": "0.3.10"
},
"SAMTOOLS_STATS": {
"samtools": 1.21
},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are these here on purpose?

@@ -1,26 +1,26 @@
{
"-profile test --tools cnvkit --input recalibrated.csv --only_paired_variant_calling": {
"-profile test --tools cnvkit --input recalibrated_somatic.csv": {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we change the order again to make the snapshots comparable on review?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Order of snapshots

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