Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-taverna-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-taverna-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2EF04183DB for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:29:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 27508 invoked by uid 500); 11 Mar 2016 21:29:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-taverna-dev-archive@taverna.apache.org Received: (qmail 27466 invoked by uid 500); 11 Mar 2016 21:29:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@taverna.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@taverna.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@taverna.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27445 invoked by uid 99); 11 Mar 2016 21:29:18 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:29:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 4940E180522 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:29:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.821 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.821 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com Received: from mx2-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nFcTNeNKZQYS for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:29:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by mx2-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx2-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id F3B645F1BE for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:29:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id p65so33568481wmp.1 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:29:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oDwI5k28ZfnwqFjRoMBo3U4zOLVi9EP3QAfChhViN7o=; b=Va3HLQ4qu20RvuqTPGln92anomdZ4y/crMlIjgpvvbrK+pKsD2ODHKViqmvc5LVEi7 ELANgiAG5s7ccOX8+6PdL++4bRfH39oEIcW2vPok5WfzeWvIvCvLqhUNvPB73EVUxlCU oJm9/9Madpywk5d9MQGAhWusA5sCQQO73UFOygpU6Km3jyhoKw8Cderq2w9GgMvkpGx6 HbvNmpVEgKwAPOX1NXYuZnS66EwNwIM//cN9ynkYBR4nmtrphQAVrQETWjwikHApABkU +amqp/UcovcOaNW0NO4NcosOiJ7yN33Vh8kc3VECeulEynwAQ/FHWJm/5i2IAU6gBZch mVPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oDwI5k28ZfnwqFjRoMBo3U4zOLVi9EP3QAfChhViN7o=; b=EwQMrYMrVGkMz3nA09Jne7t47K84/fGOSlk/WgQSYDeuB9gf2+KuZHeahTthLp4yIf PBqDu1YmQlFP4xYX+nfD1s+JZXh44J6VmVa9xld4xohewuUfTSO174/vaBWVudQcliQF hnIF3y/bQLPZ848Od3x4oGa04luoVcMDlCljefT+/zX4vAdBwR48uV6/cNFxS8PZFd56 WmqLVUhGWjp2ZdHkJ+hEF0hyF6npLDeHkommEY2DdgbfCGE/CRV9UZi+9pNIiJS8h2s0 kN5EoaSybc0u/ItNGCLREJy8UcLjh1nD7RmeW4hSmdx51ukaLIyUgwZNvED/WyUW3waG lxHg== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJXeCpyN/wCI9WPoU5+VUawPAuuVvTui48uqjsvrPmypFQjUJOWEHbzutP4Jl2g4Q== X-Received: by 10.28.111.92 with SMTP id k89mr5289931wmc.36.1457731754794; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:29:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [82.71.56.38] (82-71-56-38.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.71.56.38]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id z127sm4053689wme.5.2016.03.11.13.29.13 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:29:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [GSoC 2016] Hi!! To: dev@taverna.incubator.apache.org References: From: Alan Williams Message-ID: <56E33889.5000903@googlemail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 21:28:41 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 challenge. The members of the dev mailing list will be able to help advise on any questions / suggestions you have. > > Cheers! > Willy Thanks again for your interest. > Alan