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

Confusion over name - PHEnix or Phoenix ? #2

Closed
tseemann opened this issue Apr 11, 2016 · 9 comments
Closed

Confusion over name - PHEnix or Phoenix ? #2

tseemann opened this issue Apr 11, 2016 · 9 comments
Assignees

Comments

@tseemann
Copy link

The repo is called PHEnix but the docs call it Phoenix.

And the repo doesn't have a runnable command called either of those? eg. phenix

@alexjironkin
Copy link

We do not have a runnable phenix.py command in favour of more appropriately named scripts in the scripts directory.

If used in python to import modules we felt its also more appropriate and readable to have statement like import phe.mapping instead of import phe.phenix.mapping.

Thanks for the notice on the docs not correctly reflecting the name in the repo. @ALL can we correct the docs.

@tseemann
Copy link
Author

I would rename your two main scripts to phenix-prepare_reference and phenix-run_blah etc, or have a single phenix script with sub-commands (like samtools and sga etc).

You want to avoid name clashes, and it provides a single place to get a --version option.

As per https://gigascience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2047-217X-2-15 ;-)

@antunderwood
Copy link
Contributor

I think that could work nicely. We'll look into it and maybe use the nesting parsers feature of argparse (https://pymotw.com/2/argparse/#nesting-parsers).

@alexjironkin
Copy link

Just added phenix.py with the command subparsers.

Have not implemented --version option yet, as there is an ongoing discussion on how to make in universal from git/pip. I have used versioneer in the past and like it. But I am not certain yet if this is the most appropriate way of doing it yet. It's coming though.

@antunderwood
Copy link
Contributor

It would be good to transfer the updated instructions reflected in readthedocs to the README.md

@alexjironkin
Copy link

No need, it's automatically done via the docs build system:

http://phenix.readthedocs.org/en/latest/scripts/modules.html

@antunderwood
Copy link
Contributor

The README.md on the front page still reflects the old way of calling the scripts

@alexjironkin
Copy link

Oh yeah, totally forgot about that. :)

@tseemann tseemann reopened this Apr 17, 2016
@alexjironkin
Copy link

--version is there now. It is also in the VCF headers for future reference. I had to ditch cool git version string in favour of more simplistic approach. Mostly due to difficulties in getting it done decently in different places.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants