Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ena 5863 updating validation scope #148

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Rajkumar-D
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

/** Pipeline (Webin-CLI transcriptome scope) */
ASSEMBLY_TRANSCRIPTOME(Group.ASSEMBLY);
ASSEMBLY_TRANSCRIPTOME(Group.PIPELINE);
Copy link
Member

@raskoleinonen raskoleinonen Oct 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should have only four groups (not sure what to call them):

  • Group.PIPELINE/WEBIN /** Webin submissions processed by pipelines. */
  • Group.EPO /** EPO submissions processed by putff. */
  • Group.NCBI /** NCBI submissions processed by putff. */
  • GROUP.PUTFF/ENA /** ENA submissions processed by putff. */

We might wish to rename:

  • EMBL_TEMPLATE -> TEMPLATE
  • ASSEMBLY_TRANSCRIPTOME -> TRANSCRIPTOME

@@ -77,8 +74,11 @@ public int getAssemblyLevel() {
}

public enum Group {
PIPELINE,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggest to add a few comments ->

/** Webin submissions processed by pipelines. */
PIPELINE

/** Non-Webin submissions processed by putff. */
PUTFF


@Test
public void testValidationScopeWithGroup() {
assertTrue(ValidationScope.NCBI.isInGroup(ValidationScope.Group.NCBI));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please move the validation scope and group tests into a new class:

ValidationScopeTest

and test that all ValidationScope enums against isInGroup:

@Test
public void testValidationScopeIsInGroup() { 
assertTrue(ValidationScope.NCBI.isInGroup(ValidationScope.Group.PUTFF));
assertFalse(ValidationScope.NCBI.isInGroup(ValidationScope.Group.PIPELINE));
etc.
...
} 

assertTrue(
plan.isInValidationScope(
new ValidationScope[] {ValidationScope.EMBL, ValidationScope.INSDC}));
public void testIsInValidationScopePutffGroup() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(Same comment as the previous one) -> Please move the validation scope and group tests into a new class:

ValidationScopeTest

and test that all ValidationScope enums against isInGroup:

@Test
public void testValidationScopeIsInGroup() { 
assertTrue(ValidationScope.NCBI.isInGroup(ValidationScope.Group.PUTFF));
assertFalse(ValidationScope.NCBI.isInGroup(ValidationScope.Group.PIPELINE));
etc.
...
} 

assertFalse(
plan.isInValidationScope(
new ValidationScope[] {ValidationScope.EPO, ValidationScope.INSDC}));
public void testIsInValidationScopePipelineGroup() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Replicate what is in the ValidationScope::testValidationScopeIsInGroup() in ValidationPlanTest. The only difference is that ValidationPlanTest creates the ValidationPlan.

}

@Test
public void testIsInValidationScopeNcbiGroup() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Replicate what is in the ValidationScope::testValidationScopeIsInGroup() in ValidationPlanTest. The only difference is that ValidationPlanTest creates the ValidationPlan.

@raskoleinonen
Copy link
Member

raskoleinonen commented Oct 23, 2023

  • Previously we had two groups: ASSEMBLY and SEQUENCE.
  • Out of these two groups only ASSEMBLY altered the code behavior.

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.

2 participants