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

re-enable gaff #334

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Jul 19, 2024
Merged

re-enable gaff #334

merged 18 commits into from
Jul 19, 2024

Conversation

mikemhenry
Copy link
Collaborator

going to see if we can fix gaff support in an elegant way

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented May 10, 2024

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 69.82%. Comparing base (b3fae57) to head (2596260).

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #334       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   52.91%   69.82%   +16.91%     
===========================================
  Files           5        5               
  Lines         807      822       +15     
===========================================
+ Hits          427      574      +147     
+ Misses        380      248      -132     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@mattwthompson mattwthompson marked this pull request as draft July 12, 2024 21:30
@mattwthompson
Copy link
Collaborator

Just waiting on the patch release now openmm/openmm#4572

@mikemhenry mikemhenry marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2024 18:01
Copy link
Collaborator

@ijpulidos ijpulidos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor changes needed. Otherwise, looking great!

devtools/conda-envs/test_env.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
devtools/conda-envs/test_env.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mattwthompson
Copy link
Collaborator

This is blocked by conda-forge/openmm-feedstock#135 which might be fixed by conda-forge/openmm-feedstock#137

@mattwthompson mattwthompson marked this pull request as draft July 17, 2024 18:07
Co-authored-by: Iván Pulido <2949729+ijpulidos@users.noreply.github.com>
@mikemhenry mikemhenry marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2024 18:51
@mikemhenry mikemhenry marked this pull request as draft July 17, 2024 18:51
@mattwthompson
Copy link
Collaborator

I'm seeing https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/openmm/files populated, and while the CDN might not be updated I'm re-kicking the jobs anyway. I'm offline for the day now, but will kick again in the morning if needed.

If this is green tomorrow, I'm going to merge and make a 0.13.0 based on this. Please do shout if there are other considerations we need to make @mikemhenry @ijpulidos

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Collaborator

Some actual failures here

@mikemhenry
Copy link
Collaborator Author

my $ is on ambertools crashing on osx-arm64, I will tinker with the macos versions of the runners to figure out what is going on

@mikemhenry
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The errors showing up now are ones I've seen reported by other people, I think it is still some ambertools weirdness where it fails to run ToolkitWrapper around AmberTools version 23.6 <class 'subprocess.CalledProcessError'> : Command '['antechamber', '-i', 'molecule.sdf', '-fi', 'sdf', '-o', 'charged.mol2', '-fo', 'mol2', '-pf', 'yes', '-dr', 'n', '-c', 'bcc', '-nc', '0.0']' returned non-zero exit status 1. which then messes up the openff-toolkit trying to figure out how to do partial charges ToolkitWrapper around The RDKit version 2024.03.4 <class 'openff.toolkit.utils.exceptions.ChargeMethodUnavailableError'> : partial_charge_method 'am1bcc' is not available from RDKitToolkitWrapper. Available charge methods are {'mmff94': {}, 'gasteiger': {}}

@mikemhenry
Copy link
Collaborator Author

looks like ambertools has some issues on macos-13, but works on macos-12 (older glibc version, x86) and macos-14 (newer glibc, osx-arm64) so that is surprising, but I feel confident that the changes made in this PR don't introduce any new regressions.

Thoughts @mattwthompson on these errors? Think we should just test on macos-14? Do you see any issues on openff repos that are using ambertools on macos-13?

FAILED openmmforcefields/tests/test_system_generator.py::TestSystemGenerator::test_parameterize_molecules_specified_during_create_system[openff-2.0.0] - ValueError: No registered toolkits can provide the capability "assign_partial_charges" for args "()" and kwargs "{'molecule': Molecule with name 'CAT-13f' and SMILES '[H][c]1[c]([H])[c]([Cl])[c]([H])[c](-[c]2[c]([H])[c]([H])[c]([H])[c]([C@]3([C]4([H])[C]([H])([H])[C]([H])([H])[C]([H])([H])[C]4([H])[H])[C](=[O])[N]([C]([H])([H])[H])[C]([N]([H])[H])=[N+]3[H])[c]2[H])[c]1[H]', 'partial_charge_method': 'am1bcc', 'use_conformers': None, 'strict_n_conformers': False, 'normalize_partial_charges': True, '_cls': <class 'openff.toolkit.topology.molecule.Molecule'>}"
Available toolkits are: [ToolkitWrapper around The RDKit version 2024.03.3, ToolkitWrapper around AmberTools version 23.6, ToolkitWrapper around Built-in Toolkit version None]
 ToolkitWrapper around The RDKit version 2024.03.3 <class 'openff.toolkit.utils.exceptions.ChargeMethodUnavailableError'> : partial_charge_method 'am1bcc' is not available from RDKitToolkitWrapper. Available charge methods are {'mmff94': {}, 'gasteiger': {}}
 ToolkitWrapper around AmberTools version 23.6 <class 'subprocess.CalledProcessError'> : Command '['antechamber', '-i', 'molecule.sdf', '-fi', 'sdf', '-o', 'charged.mol2', '-fo', 'mol2', '-pf', 'yes', '-dr', 'n', '-c', 'bcc', '-nc', '1.0']' returned non-zero exit status 1.

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Collaborator

I don't think we're using 13 anywhere; ideally we can test M1 and Intel chips but given the likelihood these issues are upstream packaging snafus and probably not issues with this code, I can live with only one version passing.

@mikemhenry mikemhenry marked this pull request as ready for review July 18, 2024 21:22
@mikemhenry
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Cool, I've got a meeting right now but if you @mattwthompson or @ijpulidos can give this another review, I can get a release cut and out onto conda-forge (I will also set CI to just test on osx-arm64)

.github/workflows/ci.yaml Show resolved Hide resolved
devtools/conda-envs/test_env.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
devtools/conda-envs/test_env.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mattwthompson
Copy link
Collaborator

Alright, I ran through the diff twice and this does everything I hoped it would, including a brief changelog entry.

I gave the automation the ✅ so, with a little luck from the silicon deities, it should auto-merge within the hour!

@mikemhenry mikemhenry dismissed ijpulidos’s stale review July 19, 2024 17:46

changes have been made

@mattwthompson mattwthompson merged commit 38eb754 into main Jul 19, 2024
10 checks passed
@mattwthompson mattwthompson deleted the fix/gaff_with_ambertools23 branch July 19, 2024 17:46
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.

5 participants