Skip to content
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

fix: compatibility with cobrapy #102

Closed
30 of 31 tasks
BenjaSanchez opened this issue Apr 24, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by #229
Closed
30 of 31 tasks

fix: compatibility with cobrapy #102

BenjaSanchez opened this issue Apr 24, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by #229
Assignees
Labels
fixed in devel this issue is already fixed in devel and will be closed after the next release format fix things associated to format of any of the model/data/script files

Comments

@BenjaSanchez
Copy link
Contributor

BenjaSanchez commented Apr 24, 2018

Description of the issue:

We should include compatibility for cobrapy, so ideally the model can be fully used by python users. In the following what needs to be done:

  • To be able to use the full model:
    • Solve issue fix: metabolite id compliance with cobrapy #101
    • Make sure no field is lost when the model is opened with cobrapy:
      • Metabolites:
        • id
        • name
        • formula
        • charge
        • annotation
          • chebi
          • kegg.compound
      • Reactions:
        • id
        • name
        • metabolites (with stoich coeffs)
        • lower_bound
        • upper_bound
        • gene_reaction_rule
        • subsystem
        • annotation
          • ec-code
          • kegg.reaction
          • pmid
        • confidence_score
      • Genes:
        • id
        • name
      • Compartments
  • To be able to also contribute: Make sure the model can go through a full IO cycle without losing any of the fields, and keeping the same order (at least in the .yml and .txt)

I have crossed out all the fields I could find in the model loaded with cobrapy, but maybe I missed something @Midnighter @phantomas1234? The final of the to-do's is probably the most challenging one, so if it's too hard we can create a separate issue once we address the other points. Suggestions/things I might have forgotten are welcome @edkerk @ChristianLieven @demilappa @simas232 @hongzhonglu

I hereby confirm that I have:

  • Checked that a similar issue does not exist already
  • If needed, asked first in the Gitter chat room about the issue
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez self-assigned this Apr 24, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added format fix things associated to format of any of the model/data/script files help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! question ideas/feedback from other people would be appreciated labels Apr 24, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! and removed help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! labels Apr 24, 2018
@Midnighter
Copy link

As referenced in #101, a lot of the open problems in your list will be addressed by opencobra/cobrapy#685. Being able to round-trip SBML files without loss of information is certainly one of my major goals with the refactor of the SBML parser.

@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez removed the help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! label May 14, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez changed the title feat: compatibility with cobrapy fix: compatibility with cobrapy May 15, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! and removed question ideas/feedback from other people would be appreciated labels Jun 28, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added standby work somewhere else is needed before advancing and removed help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! labels Nov 1, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez removed the standby work somewhere else is needed before advancing label Apr 21, 2020
@BenjaSanchez
Copy link
Contributor Author

After the merge of opencobra/cobrapy#685 and most recently #216, now every single field is readable in cobrapy. I have moved the contribution part of this issue to #218, as it requires several changes to the writing logics of both cobrapy and cobratoolbox. This issue will be closed on the next release.

@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added the fixed in devel this issue is already fixed in devel and will be closed after the next release label Apr 24, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
fixed in devel this issue is already fixed in devel and will be closed after the next release format fix things associated to format of any of the model/data/script files
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants