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

RFC: Providing a way to convert Illumina manifests to BED? #371

Closed
lbeltrame opened this issue Mar 23, 2014 · 3 comments
Closed

RFC: Providing a way to convert Illumina manifests to BED? #371

lbeltrame opened this issue Mar 23, 2014 · 3 comments

Comments

@lbeltrame
Copy link
Contributor

I post this as I wrote something similar to handle our custom amplicon workflows. Perhaps it would be interesting to have such a thing?

@chapmanb
Copy link
Member

Luca;
This sounds cool, although I don't practically know anything about Illumina manifests. Ideally we'd have this upstream of the main run as a template extension functionality that does the conversion as part of the preparation. This would help maintain a distinction between preparation (where we have lots of special cases) and the running (where we'd like to limit special cases so have everything be more robust). How would that work?

@lbeltrame
Copy link
Contributor Author

This sounds cool, although I don't practically know anything about Illumina
manifests. Ideally we'd have this upstream of the main run as a template

Neither did I, I found out by reading the MiSeq manuals. ;) IMO it only makes
sense for regional or exome data sets, where you have to define the regions
you're interested in.

Manifests are ini-like CSV files. I only implemented this part because I saw a
discrepancy with what the instrument did (I don't need that stuff, but you
know...) and the regions I calculated myself. The format at least for amplicon
studies is somewhat documented in Illumina's manuals.

(where we have lots of special cases) and the running (where we'd like to
limit special cases so have everything be more robust). How would that
work?

I think it makes perfect sense.

@lpantano
Copy link
Collaborator

closing this since it seems Brad suggestion worked.

thanks a lot!!!!

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants