Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

New Evaluating Reference Data for Bulk RNA Deconvolution tutorial #5549

Open
wants to merge 101 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hexhowells
Copy link
Collaborator

New tutorial on evaluating reference data for bulk RNA deconvolution tools, evaluating both MuSiC and NNLS deconvolution tools within Galaxy.

hexhowells and others added 30 commits October 5, 2024 08:18
@@ -507,6 +507,10 @@ Camila-goclowski:
email: [email protected]
linkedin: camila-goclowski

carloscheemendonca:
name: Carlos Chee Mendonça
joined: 2025-01
Copy link
Member

@shiltemann shiltemann Jan 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@carloscheemendonca please feel free to edit or add more information about yourself to this entry as you see fit

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the tests are still failing because the name of this file is expected to end in -test.yml, so just renaming like deconv-eval-stage-1-create-data-test.yml should fix that. And thanks for adding the testing!

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah yeah I renamed them before uploading and forgot to add that back in.

Also, the deconv-eval-stage-1-create-data_child workflow is a sub-workflow used in the deconv-eval-stage-1-create-data workflow. I'm not sure how I should add testing for that or if it's even needed here since I would guess it's part of the parent workflow?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@hexhowells shouldn't be necessary for the subworkflow no

also, my bad, it should be -tests.yml (with the s)

@shiltemann
Copy link
Member

Thanks @hexhowells, looks good to me! Will leave it open in case you still want a review from a single-cell expert, but otherwise feel free to hit the merge button if you're also happy with it 👍

@shiltemann
Copy link
Member

@hexhowells or rather, let me know if it is ready from your side, then I will merge

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants