Certain types of files possess the "replicate" attribute, which we map to "replicate_list" and use to fill in fields from the replicate table. However, this usage is not consistent (It seems raw data(fastq) have it, but not processed files). One of the fields pulled from the replicate table is "replicate_library".
However, a new attribute named "replicate_libraries" has been added, and seems to be present everywhere. My current testing reveals that it is a superset of what we currently deduce with the file->replicate->library chain.
Should we remove replicate_library and just use replicate_libraries?
Certain types of files possess the "replicate" attribute, which we map to "replicate_list" and use to fill in fields from the replicate table. However, this usage is not consistent (It seems raw data(fastq) have it, but not processed files). One of the fields pulled from the replicate table is "replicate_library".
However, a new attribute named "replicate_libraries" has been added, and seems to be present everywhere. My current testing reveals that it is a superset of what we currently deduce with the file->replicate->library chain.
Should we remove replicate_library and just use replicate_libraries?