You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@taverna.apache.org by alaninmcr <al...@googlemail.com> on 2016/03/02 13:31:48 UTC
GSOC 2016 projects
Hello everybody
There are two GSOC2016 issues in the Jira:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-900 (Add Common Workflow
Language support to Taverna) and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-901 (Run Docker from Taverna)
The first one has a set of tasks of which students are expected to do
one or more. I am wondering if it should be split into the five tasks -
so making issues TAVERNA-881, TAVERNA-877, TAVERNA-878, TAVERNA-880 and
TAVERNA-879 into GSOC issues.
Also, having separate GSOC issues would allow different mentors. Also,
Stian is down as mentor for both TAVERNA-900 and TAVERNA-901. I think
the rules would mean we only have one GSOC project for Taverna.
Alan
Re: GSOC 2016 projects
Posted by alaninmcr <al...@googlemail.com>.
On 02/03/2016 17:56, Ian Dunlop wrote:
> Hello
Hello
> Would be nice to see some of the ogc discussion on the dev list so it can
> be captured for any Apache taverna development. Nice for community
> development as well.
Yes. I have asked the student to sign up and say "hello" :)
> Cheers
>
> Ian
Alan
Re: GSOC 2016 projects
Posted by Ian Dunlop <ia...@gmail.com>.
Hello
Would be nice to see some of the ogc discussion on the dev list so it can
be captured for any Apache taverna development. Nice for community
development as well.
Cheers
Ian
On 2 Mar 2016 5:49 pm, "Alan Williams" <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 02-Mar-16 15:59, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>
>> Yeah, why I mentioned T2 was because you can run the developer
>> tutorial there and get started right away.. and the only thing that I
>> think has changed in that API for Taverna 3 is that you return the
>> activity by URI rather than by instance, and that you return the
>> configuration as a JSON object rather than a bean.
>>
>> So if the configuration is a JSON object anyway, then you are 95%
>> compatible with Taverna 3 Workbench.
>>
>
> Yes. That is what is being done by an MSc student we have in Manchester
> looking at OGC services.
>
> The main work of discovering what building blocks are available, what
> inputs and outputs they have, the cardinality of the data on the
> inputs/outputs, invoking the "block", dealing with results or errors, all
> that is basically the same.
>
> I think the Taverna 3 workbench can run from SNAPSHOT builds, but it
>> might need some updates, e.g. it refers to
>> net.sf.taverna.t2.maven.plugins:taverna-maven-plugin:0.3.1-SNAPSHOT
>> rather than the org.apache.taverna.osgi version that is under a VOTE
>> right now.
>>
>
> Alan
>
>
Re: GSOC 2016 projects
Posted by Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com>.
On 02-Mar-16 15:59, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Yeah, why I mentioned T2 was because you can run the developer
> tutorial there and get started right away.. and the only thing that I
> think has changed in that API for Taverna 3 is that you return the
> activity by URI rather than by instance, and that you return the
> configuration as a JSON object rather than a bean.
>
> So if the configuration is a JSON object anyway, then you are 95%
> compatible with Taverna 3 Workbench.
Yes. That is what is being done by an MSc student we have in Manchester
looking at OGC services.
The main work of discovering what building blocks are available, what
inputs and outputs they have, the cardinality of the data on the
inputs/outputs, invoking the "block", dealing with results or errors,
all that is basically the same.
> I think the Taverna 3 workbench can run from SNAPSHOT builds, but it
> might need some updates, e.g. it refers to
> net.sf.taverna.t2.maven.plugins:taverna-maven-plugin:0.3.1-SNAPSHOT
> rather than the org.apache.taverna.osgi version that is under a VOTE
> right now.
Alan
Re: GSOC 2016 projects
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
Yeah, why I mentioned T2 was because you can run the developer
tutorial there and get started right away.. and the only thing that I
think has changed in that API for Taverna 3 is that you return the
activity by URI rather than by instance, and that you return the
configuration as a JSON object rather than a bean.
So if the configuration is a JSON object anyway, then you are 95%
compatible with Taverna 3 Workbench.
I think the Taverna 3 workbench can run from SNAPSHOT builds, but it
might need some updates, e.g. it refers to
net.sf.taverna.t2.maven.plugins:taverna-maven-plugin:0.3.1-SNAPSHOT
rather than the org.apache.taverna.osgi version that is under a VOTE
right now.
On 2 March 2016 at 14:38, Ian Dunlop <ia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> If some of the projects are aiming to do things for T2 eg the CWL UI add on
> then we need to make sure that it is portable to T3 (probably - we are
> still a bit vague on the T3 workbench angle). I guess it would be a T2
> plugin so there would be no need to release a new T2.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ian
>
> On 2 March 2016 at 14:25, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I was not sure about how many subtasks the GSOC student would
>> want to go for - I propose that the prospective GSOC students write
>> up a plan about which task(s) they want to focus on, and then we see
>> if we have enough mentors available - as we would need one unique
>> mentor per accepted proposal.
>>
>> Who else would be willing to mentor a GSOC student? The "Run docker"
>> proposal should be quite independent as it's just a new Activity (it
>> would be up to the student ot learn docker! :-) - and likewise the CWL
>> Browse task (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-880 ) which
>> Manamgoda has shown an interest in, is basically adding a UI thing to
>> the workbench.
>>
>> If we have more than one student wanting to do CWL (Willy has shown an
>> interest in TAVERNA-900) and we have another mentor, then I can be the
>> mentor on the 'core' CWL proposal if someone else joins in.
>>
>> Note: You don't strictly speaking need to be a Taverna committer to be
>> mentoring a GSOC student, as long as the Taverna community (and our
>> own Incubator mentors) are willing to vouch for you as being part of
>> the Taverna community.
>>
>> On 2 March 2016 at 12:31, alaninmcr <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello everybody
>> >
>> > There are two GSOC2016 issues in the Jira:
>> >
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-900 (Add Common Workflow
>> > Language support to Taverna) and
>> >
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-901 (Run Docker from
>> Taverna)
>> >
>> > The first one has a set of tasks of which students are expected to do
>> one or
>> > more. I am wondering if it should be split into the five tasks - so
>> making
>> > issues TAVERNA-881, TAVERNA-877, TAVERNA-878, TAVERNA-880 and TAVERNA-879
>> > into GSOC issues.
>> >
>> > Also, having separate GSOC issues would allow different mentors. Also,
>> Stian
>> > is down as mentor for both TAVERNA-900 and TAVERNA-901. I think the rules
>> > would mean we only have one GSOC project for Taverna.
>> >
>> > Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
>> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: GSOC 2016 projects
Posted by Ian Dunlop <ia...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
If some of the projects are aiming to do things for T2 eg the CWL UI add on
then we need to make sure that it is portable to T3 (probably - we are
still a bit vague on the T3 workbench angle). I guess it would be a T2
plugin so there would be no need to release a new T2.
Cheers,
Ian
On 2 March 2016 at 14:25, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yeah, I was not sure about how many subtasks the GSOC student would
> want to go for - I propose that the prospective GSOC students write
> up a plan about which task(s) they want to focus on, and then we see
> if we have enough mentors available - as we would need one unique
> mentor per accepted proposal.
>
> Who else would be willing to mentor a GSOC student? The "Run docker"
> proposal should be quite independent as it's just a new Activity (it
> would be up to the student ot learn docker! :-) - and likewise the CWL
> Browse task (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-880 ) which
> Manamgoda has shown an interest in, is basically adding a UI thing to
> the workbench.
>
> If we have more than one student wanting to do CWL (Willy has shown an
> interest in TAVERNA-900) and we have another mentor, then I can be the
> mentor on the 'core' CWL proposal if someone else joins in.
>
> Note: You don't strictly speaking need to be a Taverna committer to be
> mentoring a GSOC student, as long as the Taverna community (and our
> own Incubator mentors) are willing to vouch for you as being part of
> the Taverna community.
>
> On 2 March 2016 at 12:31, alaninmcr <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hello everybody
> >
> > There are two GSOC2016 issues in the Jira:
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-900 (Add Common Workflow
> > Language support to Taverna) and
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-901 (Run Docker from
> Taverna)
> >
> > The first one has a set of tasks of which students are expected to do
> one or
> > more. I am wondering if it should be split into the five tasks - so
> making
> > issues TAVERNA-881, TAVERNA-877, TAVERNA-878, TAVERNA-880 and TAVERNA-879
> > into GSOC issues.
> >
> > Also, having separate GSOC issues would allow different mentors. Also,
> Stian
> > is down as mentor for both TAVERNA-900 and TAVERNA-901. I think the rules
> > would mean we only have one GSOC project for Taverna.
> >
> > Alan
>
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
Re: GSOC 2016 projects
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
Yeah, I was not sure about how many subtasks the GSOC student would
want to go for - I propose that the prospective GSOC students write
up a plan about which task(s) they want to focus on, and then we see
if we have enough mentors available - as we would need one unique
mentor per accepted proposal.
Who else would be willing to mentor a GSOC student? The "Run docker"
proposal should be quite independent as it's just a new Activity (it
would be up to the student ot learn docker! :-) - and likewise the CWL
Browse task (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-880 ) which
Manamgoda has shown an interest in, is basically adding a UI thing to
the workbench.
If we have more than one student wanting to do CWL (Willy has shown an
interest in TAVERNA-900) and we have another mentor, then I can be the
mentor on the 'core' CWL proposal if someone else joins in.
Note: You don't strictly speaking need to be a Taverna committer to be
mentoring a GSOC student, as long as the Taverna community (and our
own Incubator mentors) are willing to vouch for you as being part of
the Taverna community.
On 2 March 2016 at 12:31, alaninmcr <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hello everybody
>
> There are two GSOC2016 issues in the Jira:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-900 (Add Common Workflow
> Language support to Taverna) and
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-901 (Run Docker from Taverna)
>
> The first one has a set of tasks of which students are expected to do one or
> more. I am wondering if it should be split into the five tasks - so making
> issues TAVERNA-881, TAVERNA-877, TAVERNA-878, TAVERNA-880 and TAVERNA-879
> into GSOC issues.
>
> Also, having separate GSOC issues would allow different mentors. Also, Stian
> is down as mentor for both TAVERNA-900 and TAVERNA-901. I think the rules
> would mean we only have one GSOC project for Taverna.
>
> Alan
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718