Set up to support contribution of selection alerts

[alimanfoo]

Resolves #80.

• Upgrade the conda environment - a newer version of malariagen_data is needed to support authenticated access to GCS.
• Upgrade cohorts analysis.
• Depend on google-cloud-sdk instead of gsutil - required to get authentication working.
• Add documentation on how to save/restore a successful workflow build to GCS.
• Fix snakemake workflow to ensure a new workflow run will reuse outputs restored from GCS.

[alimanfoo]

Hi @sanjaynagi,

I've done some maintenance here to get the build working with newer versions of malariagen_data, needed to be able to do authenticated access to GCS.

I've also added some examples to the README on how to save the outputs from a successful build to GCS, and then restore them to a local filesystem (maybe on a different computer).

Basically, this command saves a build to GCS:

gsutil -m rsync -r build/ gs://vo_selection_atlas_dev_us_central1/build/2024-08-21/

...and then this command restores a build from GCS to a local filesystem (maybe on a different computer from the one used to create the build):

rm -r build/*
gsutil -m rsync -r gs://vo_selection_atlas_dev_us_central1/build/2024-08-21/ build/
find build -type f -exec touch {} +

However, if I then run snakemake -c1 on the computer where the build has been restored to, it starts rerunning big parts of the workflow. I.e., it doesn't just build the jupyter book site, which is what I was hoping for.

Initially I thought this would be because of file modification times, because the input code files might have a newer modification time than the build files restored from GCS (e.g., if the build was run and saved to GCS, and then the code files where cloned or checked out to a different computer later - git does not preserve file modification times.)

That's why I added the find ... touch ... command, to manually update all the timestamps on the restored build files.

But even with that, I'm still finding the workflow is rerunning too much. I suspect it's something to do with checkpointing, but I'm not sure.

Perhaps the workflow needs to be broken up? Separate out the book build into a different workflow? That way someone who just wants to author or edit an alert page could do so and be sure to run only the book rebuild?