Is there a summary of decisions that were made during the hackathon?

Could I have any volunteers for reviews for the licence header line PRs here: Part one: https://github.com/nf-core/tools/pull/4511 Part two: I need a volunteer (linting checks!) Part three: https://github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/13118

who has got a pipeline that I can do a test-sync+merge with?

New version of mass PR adding license header - this time only license headers, no autoformattin, if anyone fancies: https://github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/13448 (Pontus volunteered previosly )

speak now or forever hold your piece

(otherwise I merge in an hour or so <!here>)

// Copyright (c) the nf-core community under an open-source MIT license.
// See <https://github.com/nf-core/modules> for full license, file patching instructions and upstream contributing.

Don't think we need the

(c)

do we?

James, have you spoken to an actual lawyer?

I'm fairly certain it doesn't it most jurisdictions and probably none that we care about. Do you dislike the (c)?

I copied from somewhere else (Astro or something)

Ah no wait

I copied directly from the MIT lcienses itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License

image.png

I'll push back the merge until tomorrow 😉

I'm going to discuss with our in-house counsel tomorrow afternoon

in case they have any suggestion

Don't forget we have our monthly Maintainers meeting this Friday. Summer time has just ended in the UK and Europe, but not the US. So uhh, we might need to figure out what time 😉 Oh, and I'm not going to be there because I'm flying out to Italy on vacation

Ok, I'm happy to include that copyright as is. Incidentally, Phil is randomly the copyright name listed on github.com/nf-core/modules?tab=MIT-1-ov-file

Thanks for checking with your lawyers @Simon Pearce!

To continue my campaign: any thoughts on adding the license to the module/subworkflow header? https://github.com/nf-core/tools/pull/4511 Remaining question is about whether to keep the Todo or not

Heads up,

samtools

released a new version yesterday, and you all know what that means 😉

Any opinions on this modules test config change? github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/13474

Does anyone know if the

nf-core bot

can update multiple GPU snapshots at once? I want to avoid having several commits and CI reruns

I see nf-migrate was used to do some sort of an automated template merge github.com/nf-core/mhcquant/pull/498 (same for #CED0U30KD , #CE8SSJV3N etc). I’m not sure how I feel about this approach, was this mentioned somewhere and I missed it?

There is this new module where the tool is written by the submitter and it does not expose a CLI. I asked him to add that and would wait for that until we accept the module: github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/13471 Do you agree or am I being too strict?

<!here> kind reminder that we have our maintainers meeting at 15:00 CET (I do think we're out of summer time now). I apologize, I almost forgot about it, life got in the way, and I forgot I was the founding member of #C0A2RDVD9L7 thanks to @Cameron Lloyd, we will have our meeting. I am working on an agenda right now, please comment in a thread on this message about any topics or grievances you might want to be discussed

Hi all, potentially I'm missing something / not aware, do we want to also have tests for local modules in pipelines?

Anyone else wants to take a look into this proteins-related pipeline proposal? github.com/nf-core/proposals/issues/184 ( I don't like its name btw 😛 ) @Daniel Lundin (I can't see your GH handle either on Core or Maintainers for some reason, for the approval status), @Jose Espinosa-Carrasco maybe?

Hi all, I think it might be good to discuss the following: There are many pipeline proposals atm for long-read sequencing. I think especially for Oxford nanopore data, people propose pipelines using

dorado

for base calling or alignments, however the tool is mainly distributed via github (github.com/nanoporetech/dorado) with the following license (github.com/nanoporetech/dorado/blob/…/LICENCE.txt) - @James Fellows Yates / @Simon Pearce you looked into licenses recently what do you think? ONT used to deploy the software as a docker image directly, used to be semi up to date, in the past - not sure if this has changed recently… but there is for sure no conda deployment. On top ONT is deploying a set of ONT related pipelines via

epi2me

… Not sure if it might make sense to have some sort of general guidelines regarding Oxford nanopore sequencing data? E.g always start with base called long read sequencing data in bam format or so?