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

y24-336 - BGE Request Types and Submissions #4511

Conversation

dasunpubudumal
Copy link
Contributor

@dasunpubudumal dasunpubudumal commented Nov 21, 2024

Closes #4402

Changes proposed in this pull request

  • Adding request types and submission templates for BGE (Library type was already there).

Instructions for Reviewers

[All PRs] - Confirm PR template filled
[Feature Branches] - Review code
[Production Merges to main]
    - Check story numbers included
    - Check for debug code
    - Check version

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 21, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.21%. Comparing base (168de56) to head (9062dae).
Report is 62 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #4511      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    86.48%   89.21%   +2.73%     
===========================================
  Files         1392     1392              
  Lines        29830    29931     +101     
===========================================
+ Hits         25797    26703     +906     
+ Misses        4033     3228     -805     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@dasunpubudumal dasunpubudumal marked this pull request as ready for review November 25, 2024 11:55
Copy link
Contributor

@BenTopping BenTopping left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Apologies story was slightly incorrect regarding the ISC part. You may need to add BGE Cherrypicked, BGE Lib XP2 and BGE Lib PCR XP to config/default_records/plate_purposes/* for them to show up as acceptable purposes.

BGE Lib XP2:
type: PlatePurpose::Input
target_type: Plate
stock_plate: true
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think BGE Lib XP2 or BGE Lib PCR XP are stock_plate's. @KatyTaylor might know a bit more about these attributes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

BGE Cherrypick should be an 'input' plate (as you have done) because it's the first one in the pipeline. I'm not sure whether it's necessary for Lib XP2 and Lib PCR XP or not. If it was me I'd start of without and add it back in later if necessary.

I don't think any of them need to be 'stock' plates. A plate needs to be a 'stock' if it's used in a sample manifest - none of these are. And I don't think they would be considered stock plates by the lab as they're not the ones that came directly from the customer.

Copy link
Contributor

@BenTopping BenTopping Nov 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LB Cherrypick and PF Cherrypicked (that BGE Cherrypick is modelled off) are both set as stock_plate: true.

Copy link
Contributor

@BenTopping BenTopping left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice looks good, just unsure about some of the plate purposes data.

Copy link
Member

@andrewsparkes andrewsparkes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left some questions and things to check

size: 96
BGE Lib XP2:
target_type: Plate
default_state: passed
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

don't think default state is passed on these XP plates. maybe for the cherrypick as its an input plate

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

although I now see there are submissions for each of these plates so not sure

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Used here -

ALL_STATES.detect { |s| unique_states.include?(s) } || default_state || 'unknown'

So when trying to determine a plate's state, it looks first at the state of the transfer requests. If it can't determine the state from the transfer requests (there are 0 or >1 that aren't in the expected list), then it'll use the default state.

So I suppose for plates that are the first in a pipeline, they won't have transfer requests coming into them, so it'll use the default state. That's the cherrypick plate but not the other two.

Got a meeting so can't continue looking into it now, but guess it's also relevant to think about how the submission affects the state (can't remember where that code is).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think @KatyTaylor is correct. I checked the other purpose configs in SS, and only the BGE Cherrypick should have the passed default state.

target_type: Plate
default_state: passed
stock_plate: false
cherrypickable_target: true
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

and only the cherrypick plate should have the cherrypickable_target true unless something special is happening here

acceptable_purposes:
- BGE Lib PCR XP
library_types:
- BGE
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is library type 'BGE' for all 3 of these despite them being different library preps? Seems wrong if they want to analyse the sequencing results differently. Maybe check with users.

Copy link
Contributor

@BenTopping BenTopping Nov 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

BGE Library type is already used across the pipelines (and submissions) that area already in place (that these are modelled off). It is essentially all part of one bigger pipeline where all the samples are recombined and sequenced together.

Copy link
Contributor

@BenTopping BenTopping left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, just one comment about whether the BGE Cherrypick needs to be a stock_plate.

@BenTopping
Copy link
Contributor

@KatyTaylor @andrewsparkes Any objections to merging? I think this is fine to merge now because its wip'd and unusable until the pipeline is made, in which any additional changes can be made then.

@KatyTaylor
Copy link
Contributor

@KatyTaylor @andrewsparkes Any objections to merging? I think this is fine to merge now because its wip'd and unusable until the pipeline is made, in which any additional changes can be made then.

@BenTopping fine by me!

@BenTopping BenTopping merged commit fb6c51f into develop Dec 5, 2024
25 checks passed
@BenTopping BenTopping deleted the 4402-y24-366-as-a-staff-scientist-i-would-like-to-have-a-separate-submission-for-the-new-bge-pipeline branch December 5, 2024 10:54
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Y24-366 - As a staff scientist I would like to have a separate submission for the new BGE pipeline.
4 participants