meetup notes

[mvdbeek]

• [ ] Put videos and slides on IWC repo
• [ ] Include overview of workflow in README
• [ ] Static site

New workflows:

• [ ] Openms workflows, no news so far, holiday time
• [ ] DIA workflow proteomics, @bgruening and @foellmelanie might want to contribute ?
• [ ] VGP workflows @Delphine-L is working on this
• [ ] Maker workflow WIP

Some of the new workflows might need more processing power than we can get from github hosted runner. (Though we might try and use the tool test data for the most expensive step ?) Some ideas:

• Submit to real servers ?
• A pulsar endpoint ?

Would like to make it easier to find workflows from within Galaxy:

• More central TRS
  • what to do about missing tools ?
    • Request a tool for missing tools, send to admin ?
    • Give link to install / ephemeris yaml … open issue see if someone jumps at it

For next roadmap.

• Rewrite workflow extraction, extract with labels, preview, bugs

Publishing to IWC requires coding / git experience. Lower submission threshold:

• Graphic interface for definition of test file.
• Atomic renaming, to rename tests. Extract test from invocation.

[bgruening]

• usegalaxy.eu is happy to run workflow tests, we can make this an opt-in in a config yaml file. By default we use GHA, but people can specify a list of public servers (that list we do maintain) that we test against them
• A pulsar endpoint ? --> hopefully in the next 12 month we can submit to the entire pulsar network
• Request a tool for missing tools, send to admin ? --> I like that.
• We should also filter out or mark workflows that are not runnable in a different color

[mvdbeek]

• usegalaxy.eu is happy to run workflow tests, we can make this an opt-in in a config yaml file. By default we use GHA, but people can specify a list of public servers (that list we do maintain) that we test against them

That was requested before, so I think we should do it. I am worried about debugging such workflows, but maybe that's the push we need to really get a grip on scheduling exceptions.

[bwlang]

Sorry I missed this!...
We have some policy/infrastructure issues open:

• purpose/mission
• which workflows do we want to accept - which are not appropriate

• code of conduct

  I'll try to put some energy into making/copying drafts over unless someone else is interested.

[mvdbeek]

Yes, those are important points, any input is welcome.

[bgruening]

• usegalaxy.eu is happy to run workflow tests, we can make this an opt-in in a config yaml file. By default we use GHA, but people can specify a list of public servers (that list we do maintain) that we test against them

That was requested before, so I think we should do it. I am worried about debugging such workflows, but maybe that's the push we need to really get a grip on scheduling exceptions.

can we not make this public by default?

[mvdbeek]

These are unstructured exceptions (or just pauses in the worst case), I don't think we can make all of the logs public, and even that you'd have to sift through the invocation logs if the server is busy ... we need to add an additional relationship for scheduling errors, and then create them when we get into exceptions or unexpected situations.