-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
feat: add cwl runner source #263
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
feat: add cwl runner source #263
Conversation
src/introduction/prerequisites.md
Outdated
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ $ (venv) pip install cwltool | |||
``` | |||
|
|||
```{note} | |||
You can find the `cwl-runner source code` [here](https://github.com/common-workflow-language/cwltool/tree/main/cwlref-runner). <br> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As this is Markdown, maybe a double break line instead of <br>
would add the space between paragraphs, I think.
@kinow is it better now? |
I think the formatting is incorrect (missed a quote somewhere I think?). If you click on the docs/readthedocs.org:common-workflow-languageuser-guide Check link below 👇 it should give you an URL to preview your change. Here's what it's rendering for me: Not sure if you need one or two blank lines in the source to achieve that, but you can test that locally too 👍 |
@kinow sorry for taking so long to adjust this. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not a problem on the delay to reply. I'm in +12 or +13 UTC normally, so my answers may be very quick, or take a very long time. 🙂
This is what I see in the rendered version. I think we only want to have cwl-runner
in a different formatting, as that's the name of the Python module. No reason for highlighting the "source code" part IMO.
I'm in GMT+1 and it's almost 2:00am here. I'm up because I was hoping you'd reply 😅 I'll quickly make these changes then |
😮 another night owl! Don't worry as when you wake up @swzCuroverse and others will be up and will review this PR 👍 I am not an Outreachy mentor. I'm just leaving comments here and there where I can help. The final review & merge will be performed by an Outreachy mentor anyway, so don't worry about my feedback 👍 But thanks for the prompt feedback so far! 👏 |
Thanks for helping me out too! |
How does it look now? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks great to me! Leaving it to @swzCuroverse and others to review & merge it. Thanks @Fienne !
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good. I just had to resolve some merge conflict. I kept the Let's use a simple CWL tool description version instead of "workflow" - because it is more accurate. If you want to change it back, please do so.
fixes issue in Introduction/Prerequisite under Expanding/Revising Existing Content #253