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 <[email protected] > 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 < > [email protected]>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 <[email protected]> > >> 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 <[email protected]> > 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 <[email protected]> > >> 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 < > [email protected] > >>>>> 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 > >
