You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've been hitting a bug with Augur >=24 on a preexisting workflow that used a genbank file that uses "region" in place of "source".
This PR started requiring specifically source: #1351 - and I never traced down while I got the failure. I didn't understand at first what was happening. In retrospect it would have been helpful to have the error mention that this breaking change occurs since v24
Description
I don't know much about genbank files in the wild, so maybe this usage of region instead of source was an idiosyncracy of my gb file (I don't know where I got it from) - but in case that others use region instead of source, it might make sense to treat region as a synonym of source? At least in my case, the two contain equivalent information:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Context
I've been hitting a bug with Augur >=24 on a preexisting workflow that used a genbank file that uses "region" in place of "source".
This PR started requiring specifically source: #1351 - and I never traced down while I got the failure. I didn't understand at first what was happening. In retrospect it would have been helpful to have the error mention that this breaking change occurs since v24
Description
I don't know much about genbank files in the wild, so maybe this usage of region instead of source was an idiosyncracy of my gb file (I don't know where I got it from) - but in case that others use region instead of source, it might make sense to treat region as a synonym of source? At least in my case, the two contain equivalent information:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: