Remove params.enable_conda #2131
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #2131 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 71.47% 71.45% -0.03%
==========================================
Files 77 77
Lines 8358 8358
==========================================
- Hits 5974 5972 -2
- Misses 2384 2386 +2
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
| update_old = ModuleUpdate( | ||
| self.pipeline_dir, update_all=True, show_diff=False, sha="5e34754d42cd2d5d248ca8673c0a53cdf5624905" | ||
| ) | ||
| update_old.update() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is your thinking here, that this change will be tested when we look at the modules.json? Should we maybe
explicitly test that the correct linting test fails?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test makes sure that when we want to only show the differences but not update the module, it is not updated. Specially when there is a patch file because there was a bug on that edge case.
Before updating the modules in the template, we had an old version, so these two new lines were not necessary. Now, as we have the latest version, we need to revert to an older SHA, to be able to test the update afterwards.
| // Check that a -profile or Nextflow config has been provided to run the pipeline | ||
| NfcoreTemplate.checkConfigProvided(workflow, log) | ||
|
|
||
| // Check that conda channels are set-up correctly |
| // Check that conda channels are set-up correctly | ||
| if (params.enable_conda) { | ||
| Utils.checkCondaChannels(log) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
Need to remove from here too: Not sure whether it is still present anywhere else in the repo or whether it has any impact elsewhere in terms of linting. |
|
Thank you! 🙂 |
Close #2125
Follow up from #1952 and modules/#2654
PR checklist
CHANGELOG.mdis updateddocsis updated