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

Clarified comment for purpose of GatherVcfs #1758

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 8, 2021
Merged

Conversation

rickymagner
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This very very short PR clarifies the purpose of the GatherVcfs tool, changing the phrase "totally discrete" to the more accurate "nonoverlapping." Compare with the Picard documentation here to see this is the intended purpose. The reason this confused me a bit was that technically you could have two vcfs with discrete sets of intervals which do overlap (e.g. chr1:100-101 + chr2:100-101 and chr1:100-101 + chr3:100-101), which certainly should not be used as input into this tool. Changing it here should eventually change the corresponding text on the GATK documentation page as well, once it's incorporated into GATK.


Checklist (never delete this)

Never delete this, it is our record that procedure was followed. If you find that for whatever reason one of the checklist points doesn't apply to your PR, you can leave it unchecked but please add an explanation below.

Content

  • Added or modified tests to cover changes and any new functionality
  • Edited the README / documentation (if applicable)
  • All tests passing on Travis

Review

  • Final thumbs-up from reviewer
  • Rebase, squash and reword as applicable

For more detailed guidelines, see https://github.com/broadinstitute/picard/wiki/Guidelines-for-pull-requests

@gbggrant gbggrant merged commit 4042ef9 into master Dec 8, 2021
@rickymagner rickymagner deleted the rm_gathervcfs_typo branch December 8, 2021 18:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants