https://github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/9569 I would need to merge this to finish up the testing in my tools PR, do you think it's ok to merge?

to agree on the naming, 2 details: • I have changed

lock file

to

lock_file

• Do we want to change

linux/amd64

to

linux_amd64

?

@Phil Ewels is this still true? https://github.com/nextflow-io/nextflow/issues/5583#issuecomment-2875484270 If so, that's a blocker for the container configs

This is a good point - is it something we've considered for the pipeline-level config generation @Júlia Mir? If the primary container is overwritten at config level within a pipeline, how will we fetch the other containers? 🤔 I feel like this might need to be a new CLI command for pipeline devs to run or something..

back from vacation 🥱 is there anything that needs some pair of eyes or help to push over the finish line?

figure, it's more an issue for here, than in #C069B2Z5P1R

any preferences how the conda lock files for each module should be called? I was thinking of

.conda/$arch-$buildId.txt

, e.g. `.conda/amd64-d58f60e4deb769bf_1.txt`👍🏻 👎🏻 ?

can i somehow request higher API limits from the gods of wave wave containers

Wave invalid response: [429] {"message":"Request exceeded pull rate limit for IP

shakefist

@Edmund it looks like you added a new GitHub action to #CJRH30T6V that errors if the PR is coming from a fork. You did dit a while back, August last year, in this PR: https://github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/8911 It just got merged, and now all PRs coming from forks are failing CI.. ❌ I don't think that we want this..? And the timing stuff makes me think that it was maybe unintentional?

I suggest that we disable this for now to allow PRs to continue

Longer term, I feel like we should be able to trigger Wave builds even on PRs from forks, just need a bit of GitHub actions magic to make it work with the secrets etc. So I'm hoping that this restriction isn't necessary.

ah, that's where these errors are coming from. please post in #CJRH30T6V to inform people about it (even if you will revert it)

We're ok to keep merging PRs right? Like this one?

PR to disable the workflow: https://github.com/nf-core/modules/pull/9760

Will wait 1 more minute and then cowboy this bad boy cool cowboy

ah @mashehu, I was like 5 seconds off selecting a cowboy gif when your review came in 😆

a-man-in-a-cowboy-hat-and-sunglasses-says-simmer-down-cowboy.gif

I think the "core nextflow option" log will fill up quite a bit with the new container setup. any way to avoid this?

do we really need this as a special command (source):

# Docker linux/arch64 build and fetch conda lock file
nf-core modules containers conda-lock [module-name]

imo this should just be part of

nf-core m containers create

in wave cli, how can i specify seqera containers as the

--build-repo

? @Phil Ewels

Multi-platform builds on Wave 🤫 https://github.com/seqeralabs/wave/pull/982

after more testing in random modules (https://github.com/seqeralabs/wave/issues/1009) maybe let's not put the modules container command in this release... sad cowboy needs more testing and bug fixes

I noticed that the conda lock files are now shipped in with the modules, should we include them in the pipelines when we update the modules, or should we wait?

Does it help us at all that Wave now supports multi-platform container builds? github.com/seqeralabs/wave/pull/985 (NB: Docker only, not Singularity)

@Marcel Ribeiro-Dantas would like us to support apple containers in nf-core. Seems like a good idea to do it in this project?

Can anyone remind me why we didn't just cram all 4+ container URIs into some squiggly brackets in the

process.container

directive? Instead of all the stuff with

meta.yml

and creating config files and stuff. I'm pretty sure we discussed it and I almost certainly advocated against it, I'm just struggling to remember why 🙈 😆

Not sure where the best place to ask this is but figure folk here would know... I have built a container for COMEBin using Seqera containers, which depends on CheckM. The Bioconda recipe for CheckM includes a post-link script (github.com/bioconda/bioconda-recipes/blob/…/post-link.sh) that downloads and sets up the required database, but when I run CheckM in the container this is not set up correctly. Do these scripts not get run when building a Seqera container?

No project in the hackathon to convert to new container syntax or update to wave containers? Anyone interested?

Asking here as I think someone would know... if I have a Seqera container path, is it possible to get the build log for it somehow?

Wave as hosted by Seqera has supported multi-arch singularity/apptainer builds through oras for a while (which is essentially the two different architectures built separately and relying on oras smarts to deliver the correct thing). This is now also supported by the latest support by the latest wave-cli (from the main wave repository now). This has been working for Given this, I think

nf-core modules container create

should be updated to switch to provide these links by default in the

main.yml

. I'd be happy hearing why I'm wrong before I start doing things :) (My long term goal is having sensible support of multi-architecture setups, such as NAISS have now with arrhenius with arm64 GPU machines and amd64 CPUs - I have at least not found a workable way to deal with that with the current setup.)