taverna-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Williams <alanin...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [GSoC 2016] Hi!!
Date Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:28:41 GMT
On 07-Mar-16 18:48, Willy Aguirre wrote:
> Hi!

Hello Willy

Thank you for your interest in the Taverna GSOC issues.

> I'm Willy Aguirre from Lima Peru Actually I'm studing at UPC(
> http://epe.upc.edu.pe/)
> I don't have experience in Workflow System but I used BPMN (Bisagi) I think
> is new experience for me.
> I'm working as a java developer and also I used Play Framework 1.* it uses
> yaml
> https://pe.linkedin.com/in/willyaguirre
> I passed GSoC 2015 for Apache Aurora
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1164
> I'm interesting in these ideas
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-881
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-879

These two issues (881 and 879) are part of a group 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-900 for adding support for 
the Common Workflow Language to Taverna. For information about CWL, 
please follow the links in the description of 900. GSOC students are 
only expected to do one, or maybe two, of the issues - so do not panic :)

I think 879 consists of four sub-tasks.

(a) creating small workflows corresponding to the calling of a single 
Taverna activity,

(b) putting a Taverna Command Line Tool that calls a Taverna workflow 
into a docker image

(c) creating a CWL configuration for the docker so that the Taverna 
workflow can be run as part of a CWL workflow.

The fourth task

(d) extend the CWL reader so that it recognizes CWL processes that wrap 
Taverna workflows and re-instate the Taverna workflow (or activity if a 
single activity)

depends on someone doing 877 and so obviously may not be done (if no one 
does 877) or will require co-ordination.

For 879, I think your proposal would be relatively easy to write as the 
issue is well-organized.

881 (saving Taverna workflows as CWL) is less straight-forward and you 
would need to put more work into how you would go about achieving the 
task, especially how to have testable parts.

For me (and other people will have different opinions), 879 is primarily 
a programming issue, but 881 is more "software engineering". Which one 
you choose to do will depend on what you would like to get out of GSOC. 
As you have already done a programming GSOC, perhaps 879 would be a good 

The members of the dev mailing list will be able to help advise on any 
questions / suggestions you have.

> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1164>
> Cheers!
> Willy

Thanks again for your interest.

> <https://pe.linkedin.com/in/willyaguirre>


View raw message