I understand that instead of having one dataset with multiple files you are
planning to use existing datasets and combine them in a ‘collection’. My
concerns are:
This needs to be fleshed out much more, but this is not exactly what
we are thinking. The main change is to make it possible for a
: Monday, 4 March 2013 4:42 PM
To: Khassapov, Alex (CSIRO IMT, Clayton)
Cc: galaxy-...@bx.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [galaxy-dev] Composite datatype output for Cuffdiff
Hi Alex,
Thanks for the comments. The galaxy team has made it clear here and to
me privately that this will NOT be included
: Re: [galaxy-dev] Composite datatype output for Cuffdiff
Alex,
To reiterate what Jeremy has already said on the mailing list, this is
definitely something we want, and need, for Galaxy. While this particular
implementation has a lot of good parts, creating these collections as
first-class
Message-
From: galaxy-dev-boun...@lists.bx.psu.edu
[mailto:galaxy-dev-boun...@lists.bx.psu.edu] On Behalf Of John Chilton
Sent: Thursday, 28 February 2013 2:06 AM
To: Jeremy Goecks
Cc: Jim Johnson; galaxy-...@bx.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [galaxy-dev] Composite datatype output for Cuffdiff
Hey
Hey Jeremy,
I am trying to think about a path forward with this composite
multiple file dataset implementation. It seems there is consensus
among the galaxy team that it shouldn't be included because grouping
actual datasets would be superior. In that light, I am revisiting this
e-mail, because
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Jim Johnson johns...@umn.edu wrote:
Checking to see if there is any interest in including a parameter option to
select outputs for cuffdiff,
potentially including a composite output and a cummeRbund sqlite database.
Hi JJ,
I'm highly interested in something
Hi Jim,
This is nice and is a path forward for the immediate future.
That said, a couple extensions to Galaxy to better support composite datatypes
would enable cummerbund without the additional tools:
(i) extending the composite datatype to include definition of individual
outputs in the
