Re: Maven Docker Images

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maven Docker Images

Hervé BOUTEMY
true, from a general perspective, it's like sdkman

we need to discuss then decide if we want to maintain Maven Docker integration
(contrary to our current decision to not maintain Maven sdkman integration but
let sdkman community do it)

 can we think about a general solution? perhaps not really a solution, but a
decision process, yes

to me, on each tool integration, there are key decision drivers:
- importance of the tool on the market
- interest of Maven devs to actually do integration maintenance
- complexity of integration, technical prerequisites (with IDEs, for example,
a dedicated independant project like m2e is necessary)
- time factor: things evolve over time (e.g. 2 years ago, Docker was not what
it is nowadays)

any other key driver to document?

once done, we'll discuss more precisely about the Docker integration case

and probably finish with a vote :)

Regards,

Hervé

Le vendredi 20 octobre 2017, 11:30:49 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit :

> Isn't this actually the same case as sdkman[1]?
> Just wondering if we need to think about a general solution instead of
> pulling everything into our project when possible.
>
> thanks,
> Robert
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/oofvszmf56tbr7et
>
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:30:57 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY <[hidden email]>
>
> wrote:
> > great idea
> >
> > ok, we need a git repo at ASF
> >
> > what else?
> > Is there some sort of release process? some sort of source to release?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Hervé
> >
> > Le jeudi 19 octobre 2017, 13:47:45 CEST Mike Drob a écrit :
> >> Thanks for the pointer, Carlos! I had searched the archives, but maybe I
> >> didn't go back far enough.
> >>
> >> I think moving these Dockerfiles into an ASF repo would be great for
> >> their
> >> maintainability.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On 2017-10-19 03:50, Carlos Sanchez <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > Arnaud is correct, I sent an email to users@ back on Fri, Nov 7,
> >>
> >> 2014,>
> >>
> >> > 00:23 when I created the image>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 11:12 Arnaud H�ritier <[hidden email]> wrote:>
> >> >
> >> > > These images are kindly managed by a PMC member of our project
> >>
> >> (Carlos)
> >>
> >> but>
> >>
> >> > > yes they aren't managed directly by the project>
> >> > >
> >> > > We can easily see with him to improve this IMO.>
> >> > >
> >> > > When he started that (several years ago) Docker wasn't what it is
> >>
> >> nowadays.>
> >>
> >> > > With docker being mainstream I agree that we can reconsider this.>
> >> > >
> >> > > The docker image build/distribution could perhaps be part of our
> >>
> >> release>
> >>
> >> > > process.>
> >> > >
> >> > > WDYT Carlos ?>
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Mike Drob <[hidden email]>
> >>
> >> wrote:>
> >>
> >> > > > I guess the natural follow-on question is whether the Maven
> >>
> >> community>
> >>
> >> > > > would consider publishing an official set of images? Or
> >>
> >> alternatively>
> >>
> >> > > > whether they should send a takedown notice to protect their brand
> >>
> >> and>
> >>
> >> > > > trademarks...>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 2017-10-18 18:36, "Manfred Moser" <[hidden email]>
> >>
> >> wrote:>
> >>
> >> > > > > No. As you can see from the github URL this is NOT an apache
> >>
> >> URL.>
> >>
> >> > > > > https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Mike Drob wrote on 2017-10-18 16:32:>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Hello,>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Are the images at https://hub.docker.com/r/_/maven/
> >>
> >> considered to
> >>
> >> be>
> >>
> >> > > > official>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > > maven docker images and blessed/published by the PMC?>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Thanks,>
> >> > > > > > Mike>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> >>
> >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> >>
> >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> >>
> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> >> > >
> >> > > -->
> >> > > ----->
> >> > > Arnaud H�ritier>
> >> > > http://aheritier.net>
> >> > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com>
> >> > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maven Docker Images

stephenconnolly
On Sat 21 Oct 2017 at 08:45, Hervé BOUTEMY <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ok, let's switch directly to the Docker case
>
> I'm not a Docker expert, then I'm discovering things that my be obvious to
> others
>
> IIUC Docker has an "officiel images" project [1] where Carlos provided a
> Maven
> image [2]: then this image is known as "the official Maven Docker image"
> Carlos is an individual, he's also a PMC member of Maven
>
> what do we want to say: the PMC member has provided an official Docker
> image or
> an individual has provided an official Docker image?
>
> depending on the answer, some way of doing has to be changed (Git location
> or
> naming of the official image)


I’m in favour of creating a repo for the dockerfile, license.txt, read me,
notices, etc and follow the standard release vote lifecycle for that
dockerfile.

If we want that dockerfile in Maven-core repo, i’m Fine with that too

Now the other question is how to get the image from that dockerfile into
docker...

I’m happy for Carlos to continue doing in a personal capacity...

So i’d be

“The dockerfile has been released by the Maven project and a member of the
PMC has uploaded the image”


>
> Regards,
>
> Hervé
>
> [1] https://github.com/docker-library/official-images
>
> [2]
> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/maven
>
> Le samedi 21 octobre 2017, 06:58:50 CEST Manfred Moser a écrit :
> > From my perspective it is just like sdkman including the conclusion. We
> have
> > other tasks at our hands, maintaining a docker images is not something we
> > should bother with. However needs one can easily create one and there
> will
> > be thousands of variations different users want.
> >
> > Let them create it on their own.
> >
> > Manfred
> >
> > Hervé BOUTEMY wrote on 2017-10-20 18:46:
> > > true, from a general perspective, it's like sdkman
> > >
> > > we need to discuss then decide if we want to maintain Maven Docker
> > > integration (contrary to our current decision to not maintain Maven
> > > sdkman integration but let sdkman community do it)
> > >
> > > can we think about a general solution? perhaps not really a solution,
> but
> > > a
> > > decision process, yes
> > >
> > > to me, on each tool integration, there are key decision drivers:
> > > - importance of the tool on the market
> > > - interest of Maven devs to actually do integration maintenance
> > > - complexity of integration, technical prerequisites (with IDEs, for
> > > example, a dedicated independant project like m2e is necessary)
> > > - time factor: things evolve over time (e.g. 2 years ago, Docker was
> not
> > > what it is nowadays)
> > >
> > > any other key driver to document?
> > >
> > > once done, we'll discuss more precisely about the Docker integration
> case
> > >
> > > and probably finish with a vote :)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Hervé
> > >
> > > Le vendredi 20 octobre 2017, 11:30:49 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit :
> > >> Isn't this actually the same case as sdkman[1]?
> > >> Just wondering if we need to think about a general solution instead of
> > >> pulling everything into our project when possible.
> > >>
> > >> thanks,
> > >> Robert
> > >>
> > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/oofvszmf56tbr7et
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:30:57 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY <
> [hidden email]>
> > >>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > great idea
> > >> >
> > >> > ok, we need a git repo at ASF
> > >> >
> > >> > what else?
> > >> > Is there some sort of release process? some sort of source to
> release?
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards,
> > >> >
> > >> > Hervé
> > >> >
> > >> > Le jeudi 19 octobre 2017, 13:47:45 CEST Mike Drob a écrit :
> > >> >> Thanks for the pointer, Carlos! I had searched the archives, but
> maybe
> > >> >> I
> > >> >> didn't go back far enough.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I think moving these Dockerfiles into an ASF repo would be great
> for
> > >> >> their
> > >> >> maintainability.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Mike
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 2017-10-19 03:50, Carlos Sanchez <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >> >> > Arnaud is correct, I sent an email to users@ back on Fri, Nov 7,
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 2014,>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > 00:23 when I created the image>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 11:12 Arnaud H�ritier <[hidden email]>
> > >> >> > wrote:>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > These images are kindly managed by a PMC member of our project
> > >> >>
> > >> >> (Carlos)
> > >> >>
> > >> >> but>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > yes they aren't managed directly by the project>
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > We can easily see with him to improve this IMO.>
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > When he started that (several years ago) Docker wasn't what it
> is
> > >> >>
> > >> >> nowadays.>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > With docker being mainstream I agree that we can reconsider
> this.>
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > The docker image build/distribution could perhaps be part of
> our
> > >> >>
> > >> >> release>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > process.>
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > WDYT Carlos ?>
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Mike Drob <[hidden email]>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> wrote:>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > I guess the natural follow-on question is whether the Maven
> > >> >>
> > >> >> community>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > would consider publishing an official set of images? Or
> > >> >>
> > >> >> alternatively>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > whether they should send a takedown notice to protect their
> > >> >> > > > brand
> > >> >>
> > >> >> and>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > trademarks...>
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > On 2017-10-18 18:36, "Manfred Moser" <[hidden email]
> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >> wrote:>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > > No. As you can see from the github URL this is NOT an
> apache
> > >> >>
> > >> >> URL.>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > > https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven>
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > Mike Drob wrote on 2017-10-18 16:32:>
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > Hello,>
> > >> >> > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > Are the images at https://hub.docker.com/r/_/maven/
> > >> >>
> > >> >> considered to
> > >> >>
> > >> >> be>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > official>
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > maven docker images and blessed/published by the PMC?>
> > >> >> > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > Thanks,>
> > >> >> > > > > > Mike>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [hidden email]>
> > >> >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > >> >> > > > > > [hidden email]>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> > >> >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> [hidden email]>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]>
> > >> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > -->
> > >> >> > > ----->
> > >> >> > > Arnaud H�ritier>
> > >> >> > > http://aheritier.net>
> > >> >> > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com>
> > >> >> > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
> --
Sent from my phone
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maven Docker Images

Hervé BOUTEMY
In reply to this post by Hervé BOUTEMY
Le samedi 21 octobre 2017, 12:32:54 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit :

> > One thing I see is that we can automate a check that the current
> > official-image
> > is our currently recommended Maven version: it's just about adding a new
> > check
> > to dist-tool-plugin that will be checked every day by Jenkins job [3]
>
> Without talking in solutions, we have this general question: Are we
> informing others by their format or are we offering some generic message
> for others to make them aware there's a new version.
>
> This disttool solution sounds like the first one (we trigger Carlos in
> some way so he can make a new image), which is exactly what SDKMan asked
> us to do.
Currently the tool is meant to check that the full release process has been
done and tell if a step was forgotten. The tool does not trigger someone
specifically: it triggers a build failure, with an explanation on what to do to
fix. If nobody cares about the job failure (which happens often), nothing gets
done: in general, I do care, then either I ping the offender (some of you
Maven devs know what I'm talking about :) ), either I just do the job.

I don't know if adding some code and configuration to send an email to someone
would be easy: I don't know if there is a smtp server available on Jenkins
nodes.

>
> IMHO whatever we do for Docker, we should do the same for SDKMan and offer
> that solution for other interested parties.
summary: there is a little difference between helping a Maven dev doing the
full release process (by checking forgotten steps), given he's credentials to
do everything, and pinging someone who is the only one to have the credentials

Regards,

Hervé

>
> Robert
>
> > [1] https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven
> >
> > [2]
> > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/mave
> > n
> >
> > [3]
> > https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/dist-tool-plugin/site/
> >
> >> If we want that dockerfile in Maven-core repo, i’m Fine with that too
> >
> > given the content, a separate repo more reasonable
> >
> >> Now the other question is how to get the image from that dockerfile into
> >> docker...
> >
> > IIUC, that's the second point I wrote: we don't really put the image but
> > update a commit reference to our Dockerfiles
> >
> >> I’m happy for Carlos to continue doing in a personal capacity...
> >
> > +1
> > I'd be happy to just have this as an official PMC asset, with Carlos as
> > our
> > expert who wrote the subtle bunch of images, since IIUC, it's not really
> > one
> > image but a collection that one can choose from
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Hervé
> >
> >> So i’d be
> >>
> >> “The dockerfile has been released by the Maven project and a member of
> >> the
> >> PMC has uploaded the image”
> >>
> >> > Regards,
> >> >
> >> > Hervé
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://github.com/docker-library/official-images
> >> >
> >> > [2]
> >>
> >> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/master/library/mav
> >> e
> >>
> >> > n
> >> >
> >> > Le samedi 21 octobre 2017, 06:58:50 CEST Manfred Moser a écrit :
> >> > > From my perspective it is just like sdkman including the
> >>
> >> conclusion. We
> >>
> >> > have
> >> >
> >> > > other tasks at our hands, maintaining a docker images is not
> >>
> >> something
> >>
> >> > > we
> >> > > should bother with. However needs one can easily create one and
> >>
> >> there
> >>
> >> > will
> >> >
> >> > > be thousands of variations different users want.
> >> > >
> >> > > Let them create it on their own.
> >> > >
> >> > > Manfred
> >> > >
> >> > > Hervé BOUTEMY wrote on 2017-10-20 18:46:
> >> > > > true, from a general perspective, it's like sdkman
> >> > > >
> >> > > > we need to discuss then decide if we want to maintain Maven Docker
> >> > > > integration (contrary to our current decision to not maintain
> >>
> >> Maven
> >>
> >> > > > sdkman integration but let sdkman community do it)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > can we think about a general solution? perhaps not really a
> >>
> >> solution,
> >>
> >> > but
> >> >
> >> > > > a
> >> > > > decision process, yes
> >> > > >
> >> > > > to me, on each tool integration, there are key decision drivers:
> >> > > > - importance of the tool on the market
> >> > > > - interest of Maven devs to actually do integration maintenance
> >> > > > - complexity of integration, technical prerequisites (with IDEs,
> >>
> >> for
> >>
> >> > > > example, a dedicated independant project like m2e is necessary)
> >> > > > - time factor: things evolve over time (e.g. 2 years ago, Docker
> >>
> >> was
> >>
> >> > not
> >> >
> >> > > > what it is nowadays)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > any other key driver to document?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > once done, we'll discuss more precisely about the Docker
> >>
> >> integration
> >>
> >> > case
> >> >
> >> > > > and probably finish with a vote :)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Regards,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Hervé
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Le vendredi 20 octobre 2017, 11:30:49 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Isn't this actually the same case as sdkman[1]?
> >> > > >> Just wondering if we need to think about a general solution
> >>
> >> instead
> >>
> >> > > >> of
> >> > > >> pulling everything into our project when possible.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> thanks,
> >> > > >> Robert
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/oofvszmf56tbr7et
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:30:57 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY <
> >> >
> >> > [hidden email]>
> >> >
> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> > > >> > great idea
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > ok, we need a git repo at ASF
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > what else?
> >> > > >> > Is there some sort of release process? some sort of source to
> >> >
> >> > release?
> >> >
> >> > > >> > Regards,
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > Hervé
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > Le jeudi 19 octobre 2017, 13:47:45 CEST Mike Drob a écrit :
> >> > > >> >> Thanks for the pointer, Carlos! I had searched the archives,
> >>
> >> but
> >>
> >> > maybe
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> I
> >> > > >> >> didn't go back far enough.
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> I think moving these Dockerfiles into an ASF repo would be
> >>
> >> great
> >>
> >> > for
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> their
> >> > > >> >> maintainability.
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> Thanks,
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> Mike
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> On 2017-10-19 03:50, Carlos Sanchez <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> > > >> >> > Arnaud is correct, I sent an email to users@ back on Fri,
> >>
> >> Nov 7,
> >>
> >> > > >> >> 2014,>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > 00:23 when I created the image>
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 11:12 Arnaud H�ritier
> >>
> >> <[hidden email]>
> >>
> >> > > >> >> > wrote:>
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > > These images are kindly managed by a PMC member of our
> >>
> >> project
> >>
> >> > > >> >> (Carlos)
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> but>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > yes they aren't managed directly by the project>
> >> > > >> >> > >
> >> > > >> >> > > We can easily see with him to improve this IMO.>
> >> > > >> >> > >
> >> > > >> >> > > When he started that (several years ago) Docker wasn't
> >>
> >> what it
> >>
> >> > is
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> nowadays.>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > With docker being mainstream I agree that we can
> >>
> >> reconsider
> >>
> >> > this.>
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > > The docker image build/distribution could perhaps be part
> >>
> >> of
> >>
> >> > our
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> release>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > process.>
> >> > > >> >> > >
> >> > > >> >> > > WDYT Carlos ?>
> >> > > >> >> > >
> >> > > >> >> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Mike Drob
> >>
> >> <[hidden email]>
> >>
> >> > > >> >> wrote:>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > I guess the natural follow-on question is whether the
> >>
> >> Maven
> >>
> >> > > >> >> community>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > would consider publishing an official set of images? Or
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> alternatively>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > whether they should send a takedown notice to protect
> >>
> >> their
> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > brand
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> and>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > trademarks...>
> >> > > >> >> > > >
> >> > > >> >> > > > On 2017-10-18 18:36, "Manfred Moser"
> >>
> >> <[hidden email]
> >>
> >> > > >> >> wrote:>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > > No. As you can see from the github URL this is NOT an
> >> >
> >> > apache
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> URL.>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > > https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven>
> >> > > >> >> > > > >
> >> > > >> >> > > > >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > Mike Drob wrote on 2017-10-18 16:32:>
> >> > > >> >> > > > >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > Hello,>
> >> > > >> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > Are the images at https://hub.docker.com/r/_/maven/
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> considered to
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> be>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > official>
> >> > > >> >> > > >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > maven docker images and blessed/published by the
> >>
> >> PMC?>
> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > Thanks,>
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > Mike>
> >> >
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> > [hidden email]>
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > > >> >> > > > > > [hidden email]>
> >> >
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> [hidden email]
> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > [hidden email]>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------->
> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> [hidden email]>
> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> [hidden email]
> >>
> >> > > >> >> > > -->
> >> > > >> >> > > ----->
> >> > > >> >> > > Arnaud H�ritier>
> >> > > >> >> > > http://aheritier.net>
> >> > > >> >> > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com>
> >> > > >> >> > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier>
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> >
> >> > --
> >>
> >> Sent from my phone
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maven Docker Images

Carlos Sanchez
In reply to this post by Hervé BOUTEMY
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> notice that we vote on source tarballs, not really on binary artifacts
>
> I see the git source changes, both in Dockerfiles and in official-images
> library/
> maven.
> But I don't see when/how images are built
>
> can you explain, please?
>

Docker inc. triggers the builds after git changes in
https://github.com/docker-library/official-images but could also rebuild
whenever they want


>
> Regards,
>
> Hervé
>
> Le samedi 21 octobre 2017, 10:59:45 CEST Carlos Sanchez a écrit :
> > BTW there are possibly more than one image build for each maven version.
> > For a variety of reasons, like security issues in OS or to upgrade JDK or
> > because docker rebuilds it, so it is not feasible to vote each of them.
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 12:33 Robert Scholte <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:19:46 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY <
> [hidden email]>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Le samedi 21 octobre 2017, 08:16:35 CEST Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> > > >> On Sat 21 Oct 2017 at 08:45, Hervé BOUTEMY <[hidden email]>
> > > >>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > ok, let's switch directly to the Docker case
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I'm not a Docker expert, then I'm discovering things that my be
> > > >>
> > > >> obvious to
> > > >>
> > > >> > others
> > > >> >
> > > >> > IIUC Docker has an "officiel images" project [1] where Carlos
> > > >>
> > > >> provided a
> > > >>
> > > >> > Maven
> > > >> > image [2]: then this image is known as "the official Maven Docker
> > > >>
> > > >> image"
> > > >>
> > > >> > Carlos is an individual, he's also a PMC member of Maven
> > > >> >
> > > >> > what do we want to say: the PMC member has provided an official
> > > >> > Docker
> > > >> > image or
> > > >> > an individual has provided an official Docker image?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > depending on the answer, some way of doing has to be changed (Git
> > > >>
> > > >> location
> > > >>
> > > >> > or
> > > >> > naming of the official image)
> > > >>
> > > >> I’m in favour of creating a repo for the dockerfile, license.txt,
> read
> > > >> me,
> > > >> notices, etc
> > > >
> > > > ok, here I follow
> > > >
> > > >> and follow the standard release vote lifecycle for that
> > > >> dockerfile.
> > > >
> > > > here, I'm not sure this really has a meaning in these official Docker
> > > > images
> > > > cases: IIUC, on a new Maven core release that we want to promote,
> there
> > > > are 2
> > > > actions that are required:
> > > > 1. modify the MAVEN_VERSION and SHA values in */Dockerfile in the git
> > > > repo [1]
> > > > 2. have a PR merged to Docker official-images to update the sha1 in
> > > > official-
> > > > images/library/maven [2]
> > > >
> > > > Between the 2 steps, we can choose to vote, or not to vote, I don't
> know
> > > > what's the best: we already voted for the Maven release that gets the
> > > > new
> > > > recommended version.
> > > > What is important to me is that anybody from the PMC can do the PR to
> > > > Docker
> > > > official-images (if we decide that we maintain the official image,
> not
> > > > only
> > > > Carlos): there is not specific credentials
> > > >
> > > > One thing I see is that we can automate a check that the current
> > > > official-image
> > > > is our currently recommended Maven version: it's just about adding a
> new
> > > > check
> > > > to dist-tool-plugin that will be checked every day by Jenkins job [3]
> > >
> > > Without talking in solutions, we have this general question: Are we
> > > informing others by their format or are we offering some generic
> message
> > > for others to make them aware there's a new version.
> > >
> > > This disttool solution sounds like the first one (we trigger Carlos in
> > > some way so he can make a new image), which is exactly what SDKMan
> asked
> > > us to do.
> > >
> > > IMHO whatever we do for Docker, we should do the same for SDKMan and
> offer
> > > that solution for other interested parties.
> > >
> > > Robert
> > >
> > > > [1] https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven
> > > >
> > > > [2]
> > >
> > > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/
> master/library/mave
> > > n
> > >
> > > > [3]
> > > > https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/dist-
> tool-plugin/site/
> > > >
> > > >> If we want that dockerfile in Maven-core repo, i’m Fine with that
> too
> > > >
> > > > given the content, a separate repo more reasonable
> > > >
> > > >> Now the other question is how to get the image from that dockerfile
> > > >> into
> > > >> docker...
> > > >
> > > > IIUC, that's the second point I wrote: we don't really put the image
> but
> > > > update a commit reference to our Dockerfiles
> > > >
> > > >> I’m happy for Carlos to continue doing in a personal capacity...
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > > > I'd be happy to just have this as an official PMC asset, with Carlos
> as
> > > > our
> > > > expert who wrote the subtle bunch of images, since IIUC, it's not
> really
> > > > one
> > > > image but a collection that one can choose from
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Hervé
> > > >
> > > >> So i’d be
> > > >>
> > > >> “The dockerfile has been released by the Maven project and a member
> of
> > > >> the
> > > >> PMC has uploaded the image”
> > > >>
> > > >> > Regards,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Hervé
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [1] https://github.com/docker-library/official-images
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [2]
> > >
> > > https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/blob/
> master/library/mave
> > >
> > > >> > n
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Le samedi 21 octobre 2017, 06:58:50 CEST Manfred Moser a écrit :
> > > >> > > From my perspective it is just like sdkman including the
> > > >>
> > > >> conclusion. We
> > > >>
> > > >> > have
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > other tasks at our hands, maintaining a docker images is not
> > > >>
> > > >> something
> > > >>
> > > >> > > we
> > > >> > > should bother with. However needs one can easily create one and
> > > >>
> > > >> there
> > > >>
> > > >> > will
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > be thousands of variations different users want.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Let them create it on their own.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Manfred
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Hervé BOUTEMY wrote on 2017-10-20 18:46:
> > > >> > > > true, from a general perspective, it's like sdkman
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > we need to discuss then decide if we want to maintain Maven
> > > >> > > > Docker
> > > >> > > > integration (contrary to our current decision to not maintain
> > > >>
> > > >> Maven
> > > >>
> > > >> > > > sdkman integration but let sdkman community do it)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > can we think about a general solution? perhaps not really a
> > > >>
> > > >> solution,
> > > >>
> > > >> > but
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > > a
> > > >> > > > decision process, yes
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > to me, on each tool integration, there are key decision
> drivers:
> > > >> > > > - importance of the tool on the market
> > > >> > > > - interest of Maven devs to actually do integration
> maintenance
> > > >> > > > - complexity of integration, technical prerequisites (with
> IDEs,
> > > >>
> > > >> for
> > > >>
> > > >> > > > example, a dedicated independant project like m2e is
> necessary)
> > > >> > > > - time factor: things evolve over time (e.g. 2 years ago,
> Docker
> > > >>
> > > >> was
> > > >>
> > > >> > not
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > > what it is nowadays)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > any other key driver to document?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > once done, we'll discuss more precisely about the Docker
> > > >>
> > > >> integration
> > > >>
> > > >> > case
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > > and probably finish with a vote :)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Regards,
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Hervé
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Le vendredi 20 octobre 2017, 11:30:49 CEST Robert Scholte a
> écrit
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> Isn't this actually the same case as sdkman[1]?
> > > >> > > >> Just wondering if we need to think about a general solution
> > > >>
> > > >> instead
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> of
> > > >> > > >> pulling everything into our project when possible.
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> thanks,
> > > >> > > >> Robert
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/oofvszmf56tbr7et
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:30:57 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY <
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [hidden email]>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > >> > great idea
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > ok, we need a git repo at ASF
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > what else?
> > > >> > > >> > Is there some sort of release process? some sort of source
> to
> > > >> >
> > > >> > release?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > Regards,
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > Hervé
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > Le jeudi 19 octobre 2017, 13:47:45 CEST Mike Drob a écrit :
> > > >> > > >> >> Thanks for the pointer, Carlos! I had searched the
> archives,
> > > >>
> > > >> but
> > > >>
> > > >> > maybe
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> I
> > > >> > > >> >> didn't go back far enough.
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> I think moving these Dockerfiles into an ASF repo would be
> > > >>
> > > >> great
> > > >>
> > > >> > for
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> their
> > > >> > > >> >> maintainability.
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> Thanks,
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> Mike
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> On 2017-10-19 03:50, Carlos Sanchez <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >> > > >> >> > Arnaud is correct, I sent an email to users@ back on
> Fri,
> > > >>
> > > >> Nov 7,
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> 2014,>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > 00:23 when I created the image>
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 11:12 Arnaud H�ritier
> > > >>
> > > >> <[hidden email]>
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > wrote:>
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > These images are kindly managed by a PMC member of our
> > > >>
> > > >> project
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> (Carlos)
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> but>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > yes they aren't managed directly by the project>
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > We can easily see with him to improve this IMO.>
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > When he started that (several years ago) Docker wasn't
> > > >>
> > > >> what it
> > > >>
> > > >> > is
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> nowadays.>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > With docker being mainstream I agree that we can
> > > >>
> > > >> reconsider
> > > >>
> > > >> > this.>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > The docker image build/distribution could perhaps be
> part
> > > >>
> > > >> of
> > > >>
> > > >> > our
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> release>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > process.>
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > WDYT Carlos ?>
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Mike Drob
> > > >>
> > > >> <[hidden email]>
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> wrote:>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > I guess the natural follow-on question is whether
> the
> > > >>
> > > >> Maven
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> community>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > would consider publishing an official set of
> images? Or
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> alternatively>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > whether they should send a takedown notice to
> protect
> > > >>
> > > >> their
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > brand
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> and>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > trademarks...>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > On 2017-10-18 18:36, "Manfred Moser"
> > > >>
> > > >> <[hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> wrote:>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > No. As you can see from the github URL this is
> NOT an
> > > >> >
> > > >> > apache
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> URL.>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > Mike Drob wrote on 2017-10-18 16:32:>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Hello,>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Are the images at https://hub.docker.com/r/_/
> maven/
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> considered to
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> be>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > official>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > maven docker images and blessed/published by the
> > > >>
> > > >> PMC?>
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Thanks,>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > Mike>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > >> > [hidden email]>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > >> [hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > >> > [hidden email]>
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > >> [hidden email]>
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > >> [hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > -->
> > > >> > > >> >> > > ----->
> > > >> > > >> >> > > Arnaud H�ritier>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > http://aheritier.net>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com>
> > > >> > > >> >> > > Twitter/Skype : aheritier>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >>
> > > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >>
> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >>
> > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >>
> > > >> Sent from my phone
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maven Docker Images

Manfred Moser-4
In reply to this post by stephenconnolly
Following up on that remark and my earlier remark that we should NOT make this official .. here are my remarks:

- so far the only binaries we assemble and call official are the tar.gz and zip archives (and even that is a gray line since official there are only sources from Apache)
- we do NOT support (by calling them official) any other binaries such as
  - linux distro versions
  - osx package versions (brews, ports)
  - windows packages
  - sdkman
  - and many others
- the complexity of the docker images is greater than any of the above since it includes those factors..

Here are a few issues why I would object to this being the official images

- only openjdk and ibm java, no oracle java, no others such as Zulu or whatever
- limited os selection (only alpine and debian and windows from what I can tell), no centos, no ubuntu
- binaries are download from a mirror rather than the actual apache servers (alternatively maybe could use Central)

These above factors imho show that there is a selection that has been made and I do not think we as the Apache Maven project should make this selection.

As such I would suggest to keep it as is.

An open source project from an individual that provides Maven binaries on Docker images. Just happens to be the case that the same person is also a Maven PMC (great btw!).

If we make this part of the officially supplied binaries we could also think about

- making binaries for various Linux distros in the first place (then we wouldnt even need docker images since it could be a one line to install an official Maven distro on them)
- supplying binaries to SDKMan, ports, brew, chocolatey and so on
- pull all mojohaus plugins into Apache (they are mostly the same committers..)
- pull other Maven projects in as desired

You see where this leads... a LOT of work. In my opinion as the Apache Maven project we should focus on just that. Maven itself, our current plugins and related projects. We all know thats already more work than we can reasonably shoulder.. I see no reason to add more.

Manfred



Carlos Sanchez wrote on 2017-10-21 03:59:

> BTW there are possibly more than one image build for each maven version.
> For a variety of reasons, like security issues in OS or to upgrade JDK or
> because docker rebuilds it, so it is not feasible to vote each of them.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maven Docker Images

stephenconnolly
I think there is nothing wrong in the project releasing official
`Dockerfile`s... that's just source code, which is what we release.

If Docker or A.N.Other then wants to go and build images from those
`Dockerfile`s then that's fine with me.

On 22 October 2017 at 01:22, Michael Osipov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Am 2017-10-22 um 04:24 schrieb Manfred Moser:
>
>> Following up on that remark and my earlier remark that we should NOT make
>> this official .. here are my remarks:
>>
>> - so far the only binaries we assemble and call official are the tar.gz
>> and zip archives (and even that is a gray line since official there are
>> only sources from Apache)
>> - we do NOT support (by calling them official) any other binaries such as
>>    - linux distro versions
>>    - osx package versions (brews, ports)
>>    - windows packages
>>    - sdkman
>>    - and many others
>> - the complexity of the docker images is greater than any of the above
>> since it includes those factors..
>>
>> Here are a few issues why I would object to this being the official images
>>
>> - only openjdk and ibm java, no oracle java, no others such as Zulu or
>> whatever
>> - limited os selection (only alpine and debian and windows from what I
>> can tell), no centos, no ubuntu
>> - binaries are download from a mirror rather than the actual apache
>> servers (alternatively maybe could use Central)
>>
>> These above factors imho show that there is a selection that has been
>> made and I do not think we as the Apache Maven project should make this
>> selection.
>>
>> As such I would suggest to keep it as is.
>>
>> An open source project from an individual that provides Maven binaries on
>> Docker images. Just happens to be the case that the same person is also a
>> Maven PMC (great btw!).
>>
>> If we make this part of the officially supplied binaries we could also
>> think about
>>
>> - making binaries for various Linux distros in the first place (then we
>> wouldnt even need docker images since it could be a one line to install an
>> official Maven distro on them)
>> - supplying binaries to SDKMan, ports, brew, chocolatey and so on
>> - pull all mojohaus plugins into Apache (they are mostly the same
>> committers..)
>> - pull other Maven projects in as desired
>>
>> You see where this leads... a LOT of work. In my opinion as the Apache
>> Maven project we should focus on just that. Maven itself, our current
>> plugins and related projects. We all know thats already more work than we
>> can reasonably shoulder.. I see no reason to add more.
>>
>>
>
> Perfect, you read my mind.
> +2
>
>
> Carlos Sanchez wrote on 2017-10-21 03:59:
>>
>> BTW there are possibly more than one image build for each maven version.
>>> For a variety of reasons, like security issues in OS or to upgrade JDK or
>>> because docker rebuilds it, so it is not feasible to vote each of them.
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>