Skip to content

Clarify SoftwareRequirement spec fields with better examples #343

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

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

mr-c
Copy link
Member

@mr-c mr-c commented Nov 14, 2016

As it is just a clarification I can merge this with 1.0 or leave it for 1.1.0; feedback is very welcome.

In summary: no specification of what software corresponds to a particular CWL description is required, if one does specify then only a name is required. A portable identifier is recommended, especially if the name conflicts with other packages or is inconsistently specified. That identifier can be mapped to specific mechanisms by the CWL implementation. Additionally allowed are identifiers pointing at specific mechanism from the generic (bioconda, Debian) to the site specific (Environment Modules).

Remember that today, in many CWL implementations including cwltool, users can specify Requirements (such as a site specific SoftwareRequirement) in the user input job object using cwl:requirements. Starting with v1.1.0 all CWL implementations that accept user created input job objects will be required to support the cwl:requirements field.

@mr-c mr-c changed the title Clarify SoftwareRequirement spec fields Clarify SoftwareRequirement spec fields with better examples Nov 14, 2016
@jmchilton
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks - this looks really good to me.

@tetron
Copy link
Member

tetron commented Jul 23, 2017

Merged into #410

@tetron tetron closed this Jul 23, 2017
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.

3 participants