Merge glygen into glytoucan #1109
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1109 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 43.98% 43.98%
=======================================
Files 123 123
Lines 8166 8166
Branches 1900 1900
=======================================
Hits 3592 3592
Misses 4369 4369
Partials 205 205 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While this seems like the right thing to do, I would not merge this before getting consent from @jeet-vora..
There is also quite a bit of interesting curation here in this record that is lost now - It would be nice if there was a way to set a prefix to "obsolete" to not loose all this information (on the website this would display the metadata with a big warning linking to the replacement namespace). Future music I guess.
|
Given that the Bioregistry primarily aims to curate identifier resources, and from that perspective, GlyGen really is just a provider, I think these changes make sense. The metadata (i.e., publications, maintainer, etc.) associated with the GlyGen entry is useful but not strictly from a prefix / identifier pattern / resolver URL perspective which again is the main focus here. |
|
Hello @jeet-vora, do you have any thoughts on this change? |
This PR merges
glygenintoglytoucanwhile preserving it as a synonym and as a provider for glytoucan IDs. Some issues with this: useful metadata about GlyGen gets lost, for instance its mapping to FairSharing and Integbio, and metadata on a resolver for UniProt IDs on GlyGen.Fixes #1084