Closed smoe closed 5 months ago
nf-core lint
overall result: Passed :white_check_mark: :warning:Posted for pipeline commit e17ad82
+| ✅ 195 tests passed |+
!| ❗ 14 tests had warnings |!
Thanks for the PR!
The else
s are okay with me, will not do any harm and in the worst case they make the pipeline more robust. I am not entirely sure that there are no downstream references to the layer ambient
which would be created by any ambient RNA removal method - will merge once I checked this
EDIT: Just checked, there are no problematic references in the pipeline
The param.ambient_removal is used within work flow AMBIENT_RNA_REMOVAL (see subworkflows/local/ambient_rna_removal.nf) to skip the invocation of that external tool.
This is meant as a quick fix when reads need to be filtered to perform that removal since these removal methods are sensitive to cells with low quality data, but only unfiltered data are available.
The idea for this PR was by @nictru in https://github.com/nf-core/scdownstream/issues/51#issuecomment-2205916932 . This was meant to help overcome the situation in which the nf-core/scrnaseq default settings only generate alevin data that is unfiltered and the ambient removal routines cannot cope with that data, but the routines that would preform filtering within scdownstream are only invoked afterwards.
I was not sure about the "else"s that I introduced, I just wanted to return a message in case the schema and this "switch" statement are not in sync.
PR checklist
nf-core lint
).nextflow run . -profile test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>
).nextflow run . -profile debug,test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>
).CHANGELOG.md
is updated.README.md
is updated (including new tool citations and authors/contributors).