Skip to content

Conversation

@GustavoYnada
Copy link

PR checklist

  • This comment contains a description of changes (with reason).
  • If you've fixed a bug or added code that should be tested, add tests!
  • If you've added a new tool - have you followed the pipeline conventions in the contribution docs
  • If necessary, also make a PR on the nf-core/seqinspector branch on the nf-core/test-datasets repository.
  • Make sure your code lints (nf-core lint).
  • Ensure the test suite passes (nf-test test main.nf.test -profile test,docker).
  • Check for unexpected warnings in debug mode (nextflow run . -profile debug,test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>).
  • Usage Documentation in docs/usage.md is updated.
  • Output Documentation in docs/output.md is updated.
  • CHANGELOG.md is updated.
  • README.md is updated (including new tool citations and authors/contributors).

readme updated with workflow directory
@github-actions
Copy link

This PR is against the master branch ❌

  • Do not close this PR
  • Click Edit and change the base to dev
  • This CI test will remain failed until you push a new commit

Hi @GustavoYnada,

It looks like this pull-request is has been made against the GustavoYnada/seqinspector master branch.
The master branch on nf-core repositories should always contain code from the latest release.
Because of this, PRs to master are only allowed if they come from the GustavoYnada/seqinspector dev branch.

You do not need to close this PR, you can change the target branch to dev by clicking the "Edit" button at the top of this page.
Note that even after this, the test will continue to show as failing until you push a new commit.

Thanks again for your contribution!

Comment on lines +22 to +34
**nf-core/seqinspector** -
<p align="justify"><br>a basic QC pipeline for sequencing core facilities providing high quality data from a range of different sequencing instruments to their users is in the interest of every sequencing facility. In order to monitor their sequencing quality, performing standardized, yet flexible quality controls for every sequencing project and sample that passes through their facilities is crucial to ensure consistent quality and dependable results.</br>
<br>The Nextflow pipeline nf-core/seqinspector is envisioned as a unified quality control pipeline for sequencing data originating from instruments of various providers like Illumina, Oxford Nanopore Technologies or Pacific Biosciences.</br>
<br>It will assess sequencing quality, duplication levels and complexity on a per-sample basis, in addition to highlighting adapter contents and technical artifacts. Furthermore, it will facilitate the detection of common biological contaminants that may have been introduced to the samples before or during library preparation.</br>
<br>Since facilities share their flowcells and even sequencing lanes between different projects, the report generation will be particularly versatile and customizable. Quality reports can be obtained with a variable granularity ranging from individual samples or projects to whole flow cells. Therefore, receiving one single MultiQC report that summarizes all input samples, or having individual MultiQC reports for sample groups determined by the sample sheet will be possible.</br>
<br>While nf-core/seqinspector is developed by and for core facilities, it will also be a useful QC solution for research groups that own or have access to a sequencer outside of facilities. This project is still under development, and we are happy to welcome collaborators.</br></p>

<h1>
<picture>
<source media="(prefers-color-scheme: dark)" srcset="docs/images/seqinspector_poster_2024_v4.png">
<img src="docs/images/seqinspector_poster_2024_v4.png">
</picture>
</h1>
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for working on improving the readme :)

In the todo on line 37 below, it says this description should only be 2-3 sentences long, could you maybe summarize your text so that it fits this constraint?

Also I'm not sure the poster belongs here, you could reuse the figure, but then you should adapt it so that it fits this readme.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hej @GustavoYnada, thanks for starting this! You have currently 2 PRs open, is #101 a duplicate of this one? Do we need both?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah yes, I just reviewed #101 , but it is definitely a duplicate. I will close that one.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Like I wrote in that review, I think it would make sense to use the tube map as illustration of the pipeline #85

@FranBonath FranBonath changed the base branch from master to dev March 26, 2025 08:10
@matrulda matrulda mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2025
11 tasks
@matrulda
Copy link

I think we might wanna close this in favor of #111

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.

4 participants