Jerome Kelleher

So what would that be for 8 bytes per node?Around 8MB I guess?

I think it's an artefact of the current exact-matching-only approach - hopefully this will be reduced when we've tuned the new recombination/mutation rate parameters.

Without looking at the details, I think we should always set a name. I'd lean towards sticking it into metadata, but it depends on how things work out. I guess...

Sounds good, but we should be a little wary about any performance implications (we've hit some walls recently with metadata encoding) I see the ``required`` flag in the JSON schema...

Yes, of course - my bad

That's pretty messy from a user perspective - you'd expect the names to be something you could predict. We'll have to figure out a different way of fixing the tests.

We don't want to invalidate all existing AncestorData files - needs to take into account this column potentially being missing and needs to test for that (== complicated). Is there...

After discussion we decided to look at this after investigating the option of adding a ``samples`` argument to ``match_ancestors``, which includes the required samples at the appropriate time.

I'll be working on this in the new year - I'm one of the sgkit maintainers.

I don't know yet how the whole thing will fit together - I'll open issues with specific things as it becomes clearer when I start working on it. Basically, though,...