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
Bug or undocumented v8 breaking change: snakemake: error: unrecognized arguments: --reason=True
#2552
Comments
snakemake: error: unrecognized arguments: --reason=True
snakemake: error: unrecognized arguments: --reason=True
It seems the reason why a rule is being run is now always printed to screen. |
Yes it seems to have been set to true and removed as a cli arg. To avoid being breaking, one could accept it, print a deprecation warning and remove later. Or document it. |
It's been marked as deprecated for a while - but no warning has been printed which is why I was surprised it got removed. |
Could anyone explain why this flag was depreciated? It's very handy to silence the A possible solution would be to include an option in Might be worth discussing this in a separate issue/feature request? |
### Description <!--Add a description of your PR here--> Detailed diff between <7 and 8, may be useful for issues such as #2552 and others. ### QC <!-- Make sure that you can tick the boxes below. --> * [ ] The PR contains a test case for the changes or the changes are already covered by an existing test case. * [ ] The documentation (`docs/`) is updated to reflect the changes or this is not necessary (e.g. if the change does neither modify the language nor the behavior or functionalities of Snakemake).
I'm trying out snakemake 8. If have
reason: True
in a profile. I now get:This isn't documented in the migration guide so it's either a bug or it should be added to the migration guide here: https://snakemake.readthedocs.io/en/stable/getting_started/migration.html#command-line-interface
Which currently reads:
This seems to be the only breaking change, no other migration necessary for the nextstrain/mpox phylogenetic workflow, so not too bad ;)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: