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

[WIP]: Proposal for a LigandNetwork class in gufe in stead of OpenFE #126

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

RiesBen
Copy link
Contributor

@RiesBen RiesBen commented Feb 17, 2023

I think we should like with ligand atom mapping move the ligandNetwork to gufe. (more consistent)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 17, 2023

Codecov Report

Base: 97.95% // Head: 94.57% // Decreases project coverage by -3.38% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (58ad7b9) compared to base (4903ade).
Patch coverage: 0.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #126      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.95%   94.57%   -3.38%     
==========================================
  Files          37       40       +3     
  Lines        1905     1973      +68     
==========================================
  Hits         1866     1866              
- Misses         39      107      +68     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
gufe/networks/__init__.py 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
gufe/networks/componentnetwork.py 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
gufe/networks/ligandnetwork.py 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@richardjgowers
Copy link
Contributor

I think this got done elsewhere at some point

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants