Would you like to share the workflow names? Maybe before and after for the
three? I could test in a default local to see if reproducible.
Your question was from a few weeks ago and I am not sure if you are using
the master branch of 15_10 or something earlier or the dev branch, so
sharing a bit about your setup would probably help (including if this is
even still a problem).
Galaxy Application Support
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Jorrit Boekel <jorrit.boekel(a)scilifelab.se
I noticed something strange in my (latest) galaxy-dist. I have around
10-20 workflows, which are in certain cases very similar for e.g. slightly
different experimental setups with the same output. I then usually copy the
first wf and adapt a few steps to fit the second one. Anyway, they are on a
testserver and I export them to import in my production instance. There I
noticed that sometimes in (always the same 3) workflows, the export to json
changes the ‘name’ attribute of the workflow. So when importing them in
production, the wf has a different name.
I haven’t been able to pinpoint where the problem lies, but the new name
is very similar to the old one. I therefore believe that it may be that I
have copied the workflow and the name of the source-wf is hanging around in
some db table somewhere. Unlikely as it sounds. To be more specific it
doesn’t show up when I do bioblend: workflows.show_workflow(id=x), but only
when export_workflow_json(). It only happens in 3 of my workflows and I
have surely copied more of them.
Easy enough to workaround though, and kind of hoping this is a glitch in
my setup only but wanted to let you know.
Proteomics systems developer
BILS / Lehtiö lab
Scilifelab Stockholm, Sweden
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:
To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at: