If you are designing a new datatype for a (set of) tool(s) and this datatype
requires a bunch of files to be in a directory and these files are generally
only useful when they are bundled together as a single unit (i.e. you wouldn't
normally want any one of the files to exist as a separate history item), then
you may want to look at composite datasets:
That works well for user-supplied data. If you just want to provide reference
data for users, a look into the tool_data_tables would be a good start.
Thanks for using Galaxy,
On Apr 4, 2012, at 1:48 PM, Aaron Gallagher wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2012, at 8:11 AM, Langhorst, Brad wrote:
>> I think I would approach the directory problem with a wrapper script that
>> takes arguments for each of the components needed by the tool.
>> The script could lay out the various files as expected in the working
>> directory and call the script. I think that's cleaner than expecting users
>> to build a tar archive with the proper structure.
> Sorry if I wasn't more clear: the tools take _the entire directory_ (which we
> call reference packages, to be less ambiguous in the rest of this e-mail) as
> the input, not parts of it passed separately. Building these reference
> packages is not a problem. They're a fundamental part of a lot of analyses we
> do, and as such, we have tools to build them easily. For the Galaxy instance
> I'm trying to set up, though, most of the reference packages that users need
> will be provided as shared data.
> Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
> in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this
> and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at: