airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Saminda Wijeratne <samin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: saveWorkflow methods
Date Fri, 07 Dec 2012 20:26:35 GMT
Great... If we all wake up early on Monday (;)) and do the hackathon in the
morning, it'll be a perfect continuation for a review in the afternoon. Any
chance we can allocate a conference room for the whole day?

Saminda

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Raminderjeet Singh <raminderjsingh@gmail.com
> wrote:

> +1 for the review. I am good with Monday. What about 1PM EST?
>
> Raminder
> On Dec 7, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Amila Jayasekara <
> thejaka.amila@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Will be great if we can convert these to integration tests.
> >>
> > Yes ! Lets do that !
> >
> > Lahiru
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Amila
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake <glahiru@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> What I am currently doing is writing more sample to put in to
> >>> airavata-client distribution. I am sure I wil find improvements and I
> >> will
> >>> post on the list.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> My plan is to use atleast 50% of the code in airavata-api and build up
> >> most
> >>> of the possible usecases.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Lahiru
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Lahiru,
> >>>>
> >>>> I will repeat my concerns at the API review too. But in short, its
> >> never a
> >>>> good idea to use Names as the primary identifiers. I think we should
> go
> >>>> through these for all of provenance data (experiments, projects, and
> so
> >> on)
> >>>> and workflows (templates, application descriptions and so on) and
> ensure
> >>>> the system exchanges ID's as handles with clients. And Clients should
> >>>> facilitate through API a mechanism for Names and Descriptions. And
> these
> >>>> names and descriptions should be for optional and for human
> readability
> >>>> only. The API's and services would only talk referencing to the server
> >>>> generated unique ids. Here we have to relax the restriction that ID
> >> should
> >>>> contain names for easy debugging, i understand thats a convenience but
> >> we
> >>>> can provide that convenience with good co-relatation mechanisms and
> >>>> administrative dashboards.
> >>>>
> >>>> Suresh
> >>>>
> >>>> On Dec 7, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Lahiru Gunathilake <glahiru@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> FYI, We are saving the workflow with the name in the workflow
> >> (workflow
> >>>>> file has an element called workflowName). I will put some comments
on
> >> the
> >>>>> API and we should put some note on API docs too.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards
> >>>>> Lahiru
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake <
> glahiru@gmail.com
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Devs,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While I was working on some samples I realize saveWorkflow methods
> >> are
> >>>> not
> >>>>>> allowing users to give their own worklfow name or atleast its
not
> >>>> returning
> >>>>>> workflow saved names.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> When we use the API we need to have the workflow name which
got
> >> saved in
> >>>>>> to registry.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think we should return workflow name as the return value of
> >>>> saveWorkflow
> >>>>>> methods and we need to provide another method to give user given
> >>>> workflow
> >>>>>> name to be provided.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please correct me if I am wrong.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>> Lahiru
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> System Analyst Programmer
> >>>>>> PTI Lab
> >>>>>> Indiana University
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> System Analyst Programmer
> >>>>> PTI Lab
> >>>>> Indiana University
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> System Analyst Programmer
> >>> PTI Lab
> >>> Indiana University
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > System Analyst Programmer
> > PTI Lab
> > Indiana University
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message