Closed Sidduppal closed 11 months ago
I don't have a deciding opinion here, but would suggest limiting the addition of additional workflow managers
Iβm not sure where the responsibility lies for long-term maintenance but thereβs currently a Nextflow pipeline, a Bash script pipeline, and the python code itself. Thatβs already a large amount of maintenance liability and will require redundant changes to each of the different workflow managers (and expertise in each of those) to make any additions/modifications to the overall workflow.
Would suggest roping @jason-c-kwan if the ultimate maintenance responsibility is on the lab itself
autometa.nf
?π ~It would be nice if snakemake had an nf-core equivalent to automatically generate a GUI for the end-user. At the moment, I'm unaware of a similar tool~
π The snakemake
framework is written in python
, so the overhead of having to learn an additional language and two frameworks is no longer necessary (i.e. groovy
, nextflow
, nf-core
)
π snakemake generates its own unit tests.. I have not tried this before, but what a nice feature this would be if it works as suggested. See snakemake --generate-unit-tests
Hopefully others have some thoughts as well π§ β‘
Did some searching...
π β‘οΈ π snakemake has a GUI ready to go, no additional framework needed. See cli options snakemake --gui
π Alot of nice utilities that could be used to help further describe the Autometa workflow. See utilities docs
Closing. If interested in trying snakemake with Autometa, please see @Sidduppal gists
Command to run (user should be in the directory where the snakefile is or point to it). The
simple
directory has the config to submit the jobs on slurm:snakemake --profile simple/
PR checklist