oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shameera Rathnayaka <shameerai...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Evaluate Suitable Scientific Workflow Language for Airavata.
Date Tue, 21 Oct 2014 02:35:53 GMT
Hi Amila,

Please see my comments inline.

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Amila Jayasekara <thejaka.amila@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am sorry, I am bit late on this thread. But when reading through this
> thread I simply got lost, what this thread is discussing. I have few
> questions.
>
> 1. @Shameera : Is XWF actually a language to define workflow ? To my
> understanding it was an intermediate representation to convert workflow
> defined in UI to java object model. Was XWF ever used by any airavata user
> to define a workflow graph ?
>

​Yes, XWF is the language defined and used by Airavata  to explain the
workflows but it is not well documented. Both server and client sides read
this description language to generate runtime java representation. ​ so
when you used XBaya to create a workflow with multiple applications, under
the hood XBaya generate xwf which describe that workflow to server.



>
> From initial description what I understood is we are looking for a
> improved "intermediate representation", not a language which describes
> workflows.
> ​
>
>

> 2. So what is the exact purpose of this proposed language ?
>         - Is it to hide parallelism in workflows ?
>         - Is it to replace the XBAYA functionalities ? (i hope not)
>


​Actually initial idea was to identify good, well-defined and scientific
domain friendly language. Whole purpose of this effort is reduce the entry
barrier of the end user. But later it is understood that introducing a new
language won't fix our issue.


>
> 3. What are we trying to achieve by this proposed language which we cannot
> achieved through workflow UI tool ?
>
> 4. Who is going to use this language ?
>

​As I explained, our direction has been changed.By introducing a new
language we are get nothing but nice description file. No functional
improvements etc ... The current language should use all airavata
client(Currently we have only XBaya) side applications to explain the
workflow to the server side.



>
> 5. Why would a user prefer (assuming intended audience of proposed
> language is end users) a language over a Work Flow UI tool such as XBAYA ?
> (In other words what are the things we can do with language which we cannot
> do with UI)
>

​Let's say you are going to write a new web base client for Airavata which
generate workflows and launch it.​ What you need to do is do some magic
with UI and finally come up with description language and send it to server
side. Here you need to learn how to write a valid XWF file and write your
own JS code to generate it. But if airavata has a JavaScript API which can
be used to generate XWF for you by getting JSON objects as input then it
would be great help for client side developers.

Thank,
Shameera.



>
> Sorry, if above questions are in-appropriate, just wanted to understand
> what exactly needed.
>
> Thanks
> -Thejaka Amila
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Supun Kamburugamuva <supun06@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think I'm not suggesting to create a Workflow interpreter using Python
>> etc. What I'm suggesting is to remove the Worflow aspect from core Airavata
>> and move it to a more higher level component. The more I think about it,
>> the model I'm suggesting is similar to what Hadoop, Storm etc has done for
>> distributed system computations. This model is proven to be successful over
>> the years.
>>
>> Keeping what Airavata does at its core can help you to build a more
>> robust system. If we look at Airavata as middleware to execute applications
>> on computing resources we can simplify what Airavata does and focus on
>> improving the core functionality. All the successful systems have thrived
>> on defining what it does at its core and keeping it simple and being
>> excellent at what it does. In that regard keeping workflow aspect out of
>> Airavata can help you to focus on the core problem. That is to execute an
>> application on a remote computing resource in a fault tolerant and scalable
>> manner.
>>
>> What I'm suggesting is to give the Orchestrator the capability to execute
>> a Driver program that is specified by the user. (This program can be
>> written in Python, Java or any other language). This driver program is
>> similar to what you define in a Hadoop or Storm configuration. The driver
>> program specifies the flow of the computation. It specifies what are the
>> applications needs to be executed, how to manipulate input output. The
>> driver program is the workflow for the user. Because the user specifies the
>> program he can program it to handle workflow steering etc. Every time the
>> user wants to execute this program he can tell Airavata to execute the
>> Driver program.
>>
>> I'm also not 100% sure about all the details. But this can be a new way
>> to look at how systems like Airavata should behave. Your thoughts and
>> suggestions are more than welcome.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Supun..
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
>> shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Supun,
>>>
>>> I think we were in two context, because I as suggesting a way to
>>> serialize
>>> and deserialize the workflow description while you are suggesting to
>>> implement
>>> some kind of workflow interpreter using Python, where Python client can
>>> send
>>> thrift calls to Airavata server to run the application. I can see with
>>> your
>>> suggested
>>> approach we can control the workflow execution process from client side
>>> which
>>> make it easy to implement workflow debugger.As you mentioned this is a
>>> major change
>>> to Airavata. So we should neatly think as this will change our existing
>>> architecture.
>>>
>>> Still if someone need to use different language java, php, JS etc ... to
>>> run the same
>>> workflow which generated by Python, we need a language independent
>>> workflow
>>> description.
>>> My initial question was what is the best language for this?. But as I
>>> have
>>> explained in
>>> one of my previous reply, It is not matter what language we used Either
>>> we
>>> can use
>>> XML or JSON to write this description, what matters is how easy to
>>> generate
>>> workflow with the provided API. Hence it would be great to have set of
>>> neat
>>> APIs in
>>> different languages.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shameera.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Supun Kamburugamuva <supun06@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Shameera,
>>> >
>>> > Using python is a radical approach for workflow I think. But I believe
>>> this
>>> > is a very beautiful and new approach.Here is a possible scenario for
>>> > implementation and running using a Python based library.
>>> >
>>> > The Python library facilitates the creation of Applications and
>>> submitting
>>> > them to Airavata for execution. The underlying functionality is exactly
>>> > similar to what Java clients provides.The only difference is that,
>>> Python
>>> > library should have a more fluent API than Java for easy creation of
>>> > workflows. We can generate the Python clients that talk to Airavata
>>> server
>>> > using Thrift.
>>> >
>>> > Here is an example off the top of my head to a Python script created by
>>> > user for a Workflow. This is a very crude example and we need to come
>>> up
>>> > with a much better API if we are going to go along this path. First we
>>> need
>>> > to write a Python script that can execute a workflow using Airavata.
>>> >
>>> > import airavata
>>> >
>>> > host = Host("localhost", ....)
>>> > app1 = Application(host, ....)
>>> > app2 = Application(host, ....)
>>> >
>>> > # we will connect these applications as a workflow using some topology
>>> > builder or other constructs
>>> >
>>> > wb = WorkFlowBuilder()
>>> > wb.setApp("name1", app1)
>>> > # you can do a simple output transformation here etc
>>> >
>>> > # connects the input of app1 to app2 etc
>>> > wb.setApp("name2", app2).connectInput("name1")
>>> >
>>> > wb.submit()
>>> >
>>> > Now we can load this Python script from XBaya. When XBaya loads this
>>> script
>>> > the Python script can output an XML configuration of the topology,
>>> XBaya
>>> > can render. There are other ways like directly executing the Python
>>> script
>>> > from command line and connecting XBaya indirectly as well. Now you can
>>> run
>>> > the workflow from XBaya. Running the Workflow means just executing the
>>> > Python script.
>>> >
>>> > XBaya gets the notifications through messaging and update the UI
>>> > accordingly.
>>> >
>>> > The users need to write the Python script by hand. XBaya cannot create
>>> the
>>> > script. Because workflow language is an actual python program the
>>> benefits
>>> > are immense. For example user can do workflow steering in the workflow
>>> > itself by subscribing to messages from Airavata.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Supun..
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
>>> > shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi Supun,
>>> > >
>>> > > I meant to say JS is a well-known client side scripting language i
>>> have
>>> > > messed scripting part. Even we use Python, ultimately we should
>>> convert
>>> > > this to java model in server side, somehow we need to serialized
>>> python
>>> > > representation to the language which java can parse and generate that
>>> > > model. In this case we need to parse python script in java isn't it?
>>> I am
>>> > > not exactly clear how you suggesting to use python here. More
>>> details on
>>> > > how end system works if we use Python would be great help to clearly
>>> > > understand your points.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > > Shameera.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Chris Mattmann <
>>> > chris.mattmann@gmail.com>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Have you guys considered using JCC [1] as a means
>>> > > > to expose the workflow API currently in Java as a
>>> > > > Python API?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > We are exploring its use in OODT, and we have already
>>> > > > created a Tika [2] JCC-based python API.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Cheers,
>>> > > > Chris
>>> > > >
>>> > > > [1] http://lucene.apache.org/pylucene/jcc/
>>> > > > [2] http://github.com/chrismattmann/tika-python/
>>> > > >
>>> > > > ------------------------
>>> > > > Chris Mattmann
>>> > > > chris.mattmann@gmail.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > > From: Supun Kamburugamuva <supun06@gmail.com>
>>> > > > Reply-To: <dev@oodt.apache.org>
>>> > > > Date: Thursday, October 16, 2014 at 3:43 PM
>>> > > > To: dev <dev@airavata.apache.org>
>>> > > > Cc: "Alek Jones (Indiana)" <alekny7@gmail.com>, Suresh Marru
>>> > > > <smarru@apache.org>, "architecture@airavata.apache.org"
>>> > > > <architecture@airavata.apache.org>, "dev@oodt.apache.org"
>>> > > > <dev@oodt.apache.org>
>>> > > > Subject: Re: Evaluate Suitable Scientific Workflow Language for
>>> > Airavata.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >Once we had an offline discussion about the Airavata Workflow
>>> language
>>> > > > >(with Milinda, Saliya and Shameera). In that discussion one
thing
>>> came
>>> > > out
>>> > > > >was why we need to invent a different language when a simple
>>> library
>>> > > like
>>> > > > >Python will full fill of Airavata requirements.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >There are many benefits in using a Python library as the API
for
>>> > > > >controlling Airavata workflows.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >1. It is a library, gives the ultimate control over the execution
>>> and
>>> > it
>>> > > > >can be simpler than any domain specific language that we can
come
>>> with
>>> > > > >like
>>> > > > >XML, JSON etc
>>> > > > >2. Most people use python and can learn it easily than any
Domain
>>> > > specific
>>> > > > >language
>>> > > > >3. You can easily create a Python library for Airavata because
>>> all the
>>> > > > >APIs
>>> > > > >are thrift based.
>>> > > > >4. If you design the constructs correctly you can plug an
XBaya.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >Any thoughts?
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >Thanks,
>>> > > > >Supun..
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Supun Kamburugamuva <
>>> > supun06@gmail.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > > >wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >> Hi Shameera,
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> Why you prefer JavaScript over a language like Python?
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> Thanks,
>>> > > > >> Supun..
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka
<
>>> > > > >> shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>> ​Hi,
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> First of all thanks everyone for giving valuable
inputs. After
>>> > doing
>>> > > > >>>some
>>> > > > >>> background search and talking to different people
in the
>>> University
>>> > > > >>>who has
>>> > > > >>> used different workflow languages, I myself convinced
that
>>> > > introducing
>>> > > > >>>an
>>> > > > >>> another workflow language is not what actually they
need. By
>>> > changing
>>> > > > >>> exiting workflow language to another will not solve
problems.
>>> What
>>> > > they
>>> > > > >>> asking is a easy way to construct the workflows.
Indirectly
>>> what
>>> > they
>>> > > > >>> asking for a sort of API which they can use to generate
the
>>> > workflows
>>> > > > >>>and
>>> > > > >>> run it. Correct me if i am wrong here.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> As most of above replies depict,  if we can get a
simple API,
>>> as an
>>> > > > >>> example, for a web based application, JavaScript
API would be a
>>> > good
>>> > > > >>> solution, and probably JSON would be a good candidate
for
>>> language,
>>> > > > >>>instead
>>> > > > >>> of XML.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> Airavata community already have started to implement
web base
>>> GUI.
>>> > > > >>>Hence
>>> > > > >>> introducing a JSON base JavaScript API would be great
help.
>>> WDYT?
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> Thanks,
>>> > > > >>> Shameera.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Aleksander Slominski
(NY) <
>>> > > > >>> alekny7@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>> Hi,
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> it is not dataflow instead focused on orchestrating
REST
>>> services
>>> > > but
>>> > > > >>>> you may find it useful datapoint - we created
worfklow service
>>> > that
>>> > > > >>>>uses
>>> > > > >>>> natively JavaScript and JSON to describe what
happens during
>>> > > workflow
>>> > > > >>>> execution:
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > >
>>> https://www.ng.bluemix.net/docs/#services/workflow/index.html#coewf002
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> HTH,
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> Alek
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Suresh Marru
<
>>> smarru@apache.org>
>>> > > > >>>>wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Hi Chris,
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Great to hear OODT community will be interested
in adopting a
>>> > JSON
>>> > > > >>>>> based workflow language and potentially a
web based composer
>>> as
>>> > > well.
>>> > > > >>>>> Airavata previously had BPEL support initially
through a home
>>> > grown
>>> > > > >>>>> implementation [1] by Alek Slominski and
later through
>>> Apache ODE
>>> > > > >>>>>[2]. Also
>>> > > > >>>>> a white paper [3] by Alek on this topic is
an interesting
>>> read.
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> I am of the same opinion that we should adopt
something more
>>> > modern
>>> > > > >>>>>as
>>> > > > >>>>> the challenges from scientific workflows
seems to be
>>> converging
>>> > > with
>>> > > > >>>>>the
>>> > > > >>>>> data flow patterns in business workflows.
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> It will be great if we can all compile a
list of potential
>>> > > candidates
>>> > > > >>>>> and hack them through.
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Suresh
>>> > > > >>>>> [1] -
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > >
>>> http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-84628-757-2_14#page-1
>>> > > > >>>>> [2] -
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > >
>>> http://www.academia.edu/1485773/Experience_with_adapting_a_WS-BPEL_run
>>> > > > >>>>>time_for_eScience_workflows
>>> > > > >>>>> [3] -
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > >
>>> http://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/services/2010/4129/00/4129a32
>>> > > > >>>>>6.pdf
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> On Sep 18, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Mattmann, Chris
A (3980) <
>>> > > > >>>>> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> > Hi Guys,
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> > I've been interested in this too - we
don't per have a
>>> specific
>>> > > > >>>>> > OODT workflow language, but we specific
workflows using
>>> XML,
>>> > and
>>> > > > >>>>> > other configuration (we are also thinking
of moving to
>>> JSON for
>>> > > > >>>>> > this).
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> > In the past I've also looked at YAWL
and BPEL - both seem
>>> > complex
>>> > > > >>>>> > to me.
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> > I wonder at the end of the day if we
should adopt something
>>> > more
>>> > > > >>>>> > modern like PIG or some other data flow
type of language
>>> (PIG
>>> > > > >>>>> > is really neat).
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> > Cheers,
>>> > > > >>>>> > Chris
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> > > > >>>>> > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>>> > > > >>>>> > Chief Architect
>>> > > > >>>>> > Instrument Software and Science Data
Systems Section (398)
>>> > > > >>>>> > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena,
CA 91109 USA
>>> > > > >>>>> > Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
>>> > > > >>>>> > Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>>> > > > >>>>> > WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> > > > >>>>> > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer
Science Department
>>> > > > >>>>> > University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, CA 90089
>>> USA
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > > >>>>> > From: Shameera Rathnayaka <shameerainfo@gmail.com>
>>> > > > >>>>> > Reply-To: "architecture@airavata.apache.org"
>>> > > > >>>>> > <architecture@airavata.apache.org>
>>> > > > >>>>> > Date: Thursday, September 18, 2014 8:26
AM
>>> > > > >>>>> > To: "architecture@airavata.apache.org"
<
>>> > > > >>>>> architecture@airavata.apache.org>,
>>> > > > >>>>> > dev <dev@airavata.apache.org>
>>> > > > >>>>> > Subject: Evaluate Suitable Scientific
Workflow Language for
>>> > > > >>>>>Airavata.
>>> > > > >>>>> >
>>> > > > >>>>> >> Hi All,
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> As we all know Airavata has its
own workflow language call
>>> > XWF.
>>> > > > >>>>>When
>>> > > > >>>>> XWF
>>> > > > >>>>> >> was introduced, main focus points
are interoperability and
>>> > > > >>>>> convertibility.
>>> > > > >>>>> >> But with years of experience it
is convinced that above
>>> > > > >>>>>requirements
>>> > > > >>>>> are
>>> > > > >>>>> >> not really useful when we come to
real world use cases.
>>> And
>>> > XWF
>>> > > is
>>> > > > >>>>> XML
>>> > > > >>>>> >> based bulky language where we attache
WSDLs and Workflow
>>> image
>>> > > it
>>> > > > >>>>> self.
>>> > > > >>>>> >> But
>>> > > > >>>>> >> with the recent changes WSDL part
is being removed from
>>> XWF.
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> It is worth to evaluate handy Scientific
workflow
>>> languages in
>>> > > > >>>>> industry
>>> > > > >>>>> >> and
>>> > > > >>>>> >> find out pros and cons, at the end
of this evaluation we
>>> need
>>> > to
>>> > > > >>>>> come up
>>> > > > >>>>> >> with idea how we should improve
Airavata workflow
>>> language,
>>> > > either
>>> > > > >>>>> we can
>>> > > > >>>>> >> improve existing XWF language, totally
change to a new
>>> > language
>>> > > > >>>>> available
>>> > > > >>>>> >> in industry or write a new light
weight language. Basic
>>> > > > >>>>>requirements
>>> > > > >>>>> that
>>> > > > >>>>> >> we expect from new improvement are,
high usability,
>>> flexible,
>>> > > > >>>>>light
>>> > > > >>>>> weight
>>> > > > >>>>> >> and real time monitoring support.
As you can see above
>>> > > > >>>>>requirements
>>> > > > >>>>> are
>>> > > > >>>>> >> not
>>> > > > >>>>> >> direct comes with workflow languages
but we need workflow
>>> > > language
>>> > > > >>>>> which
>>> > > > >>>>> >> help to support above requirements.
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> After reading few papers and googling,
initially i have
>>> come
>>> > up
>>> > > > >>>>>with
>>> > > > >>>>> >> following three existing languages,
>>> > > > >>>>> >> 1. YAWL <http://www.yawlfoundation.org/>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> 2. WS-BPEL
>>> > > > >>>>> >> ​3. SIDL
>>> > > > >>>>> >> <
>>> > > http://computation.llnl.gov/casc/components/index.html#page=home
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> In my opinion SIDL is more familiar
with scientific
>>> domain,
>>> > > > >>>>> Radical-SAGA
>>> > > > >>>>> >> also uses slightly modified version
of SIDL. Other than
>>> above
>>> > > > >>>>>three
>>> > > > >>>>> >> languages we can come up with simple
workflow language
>>> base on
>>> > > > >>>>> json(or
>>> > > > >>>>> >> yaml) which support all our requirements
for some extends.
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> It would be grate if I can get more
input regarding the
>>> > $Subject
>>> > > > >>>>> form the
>>> > > > >>>>> >> airavata community. You all are
more than welcome to
>>> provide
>>> > any
>>> > > > >>>>> type of
>>> > > > >>>>> >> suggestions.
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> Thanks,
>>> > > > >>>>> >> Shameera.
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> ​
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> --
>>> > > > >>>>> >> Best Regards,
>>> > > > >>>>> >> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>> > > > >>>>> >>
>>> > > > >>>>> >> email: shameera AT apache.org ,
shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>>> > > > >>>>> >> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> --
>>> > > > >>>> The best way to predict the future is to invent
it - Alan Kay
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> --
>>> > > > >>> Best Regards,
>>> > > > >>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>>> > > > >>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> --
>>> > > > >> Supun Kamburugamuva
>>> > > > >> Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org
>>> > > > >> E-mail: supun06@gmail.com;  Mobile: +1 812 369 6762
>>> > > > >> Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >--
>>> > > > >Supun Kamburugamuva
>>> > > > >Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org
>>> > > > >E-mail: supun06@gmail.com;  Mobile: +1 812 369 6762
>>> > > > >Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > Best Regards,
>>> > > Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>> > >
>>> > > email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>>> > > Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Supun Kamburugamuva
>>> > Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org
>>> > E-mail: supun06@gmail.com;  Mobile: +1 812 369 6762
>>> > Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>>
>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Supun Kamburugamuva
>> Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org
>> E-mail: supun06@gmail.com;  Mobile: +1 812 369 6762
>> Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>


-- 
Best Regards,
Shameera Rathnayaka.

email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/

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