Closed pmoris closed 2 months ago
nf-core lint
overall result: Passed :white_check_mark: :warning:Posted for pipeline commit 3587b18
+| ✅ 173 tests passed |+
#| ❔ 9 tests were ignored |#
!| ❗ 7 tests had warnings |!
Thanks for the review and feedback by the way! Hope this ends up being helpful.
I went down a rabbit hole trying to understand the different types of abundance files that are generated by the rnaseq pipeline, and after reading through the various docs (pipeline, tximport, deseq2) and several github/slackm tracks, I think that the current wording of the rnaseq docs is confusing/worded poorly/wrong?
Basically, I believe that the first of the three options described in this section of the docs, should actually be bias-uncorrected counts with an offset (or original counts with an offset, as in the tximport docs). I.e., either you use
DESeqDataSetFromTximport
) , orCurrently, the docs read as if bias correction and offsets are two separate procedures that can be combined, which confused me quite a bit when I first read it, since it didn't match the explanation in tximport's docs nor the one in the github issue comment that is linked in the docs (https://github.com/nf-core/rnaseq/issues/499#issuecomment-743384515).
I talked about this some more in this slack thread if more background is required: https://nfcore.slack.com/archives/CE8SSJV3N/p1724863202019919?thread_ts=1686156473.934039&cid=CE8SSJV3N
PR checklist
Linting fails, but not on any of the files I changed (
│ files_unchanged: docs/images/nf-core-rnaseq_logo_dark.png does not match the template
). The other checklist items are not applicable.nf-core lint
).nextflow run . -profile test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>
).nextflow run . -profile debug,test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>
).docs/usage.md
is updated.docs/output.md
is updated.CHANGELOG.md
is updated.README.md
is updated (including new tool citations and authors/contributors).