Re: Competing arrow tools in pbgenomicconsensus and unanimity
Hi Afif,
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 09:27:16AM -0400, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
> >
> >#!/bin/sh
> >variantCaller --algorithm=arrow $*
> >
> >while unanimity installs a compiled binary. @Afif (or whoever is
> >informed about this PB programs): Do you have a sensible suggestion
> >which arrow we should install?
> >
>
> At one point, I had read that unanimity was eventually going to supersede pbgenomicconsensus altogether. Looking at the source tree [3], it looks like genomicconsensus in unanimity is still marked experimental, so I would stick with pbgenomicconsensus' implementation.
>
> As for the name, "arrow" succeeds "quiver", so there's a little theme going on. And quiver had some meaning as a Quality Value-aware variant caller.
My conclusion from your answer is that it makes sense to ship arrow from
unanimity while removing the little wrapper from pbgenomicconsensus.
This can be explained in d/NEWS.Debian.
Do you agree with this conclusion?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: