Simon Pearce
Simon Pearce
You can just make all the improvements into one PR, particularly given the current tool output has changed. Yes, if the data version is relevant then definitely output that.
Presumably needs an entry in the CHANGELOG. What is the rational behind not trimming at all? Is the assumption that it has already been done? We could make a new...
I agree with James's summary, we should support this in general but an nf-core module would need a convincing argument as to why we need `exec` there.
> > complain about a valid nextflow syntax > > agreed, maybe as an improved later on, we can have stricter linting on the nf-core side to at least warn...
Closing as already done somewhere else
Not sure what this has to do with a PR about GLIMPSE2, but good to merge nonetheless ;)
Hmm, apart from the segfaulting 😱
I do think we could do with this ability in some way, whether bamcmp or elsewhere. A suggestion was for a completely separate pipeline for this kind of filtering, generating...
I support this, it is a commonly asked for addition. I think bbsplit works on fastq files right? So it would be relatively straightforward to implement in the same way...
@glichtenstein , can we close this PR now, given #5720 ?