airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Riccomini <criccom...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Airflow 1.9.0 status
Date Wed, 04 Oct 2017 21:35:26 GMT
Hey all,

Checking in. Has anyone tested this in their environments? Stable releases
depend on community involvement.

Cheers,
Chris

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:30 PM, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org>
wrote:

> I've added AIRFLOW-1635 to the v1-9-test branch. It's not in alpha0, but
> will be included in alpha1.
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Feng Lu <fenglu@google.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> I know it's annoying to have last minute commit com in, but this is a
>> highly desirable feature for folks using GCP operators, is it possible to
>> include AIRFLOW-1635
>> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/b3e985a3
>> 146272ecfd3ceaaa0d8567e4e9e117d4>
>> in?
>> More than happy to offer help if there's something I can do.
>> Thanks a lot.
>>
>> Feng
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hey all,
>> >
>> > I have cut a 1.9.0alpha0 release of Airflow. You can download it here:
>> >
>> >   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/airflow/1.9.0alpha0/
>> >
>> > The bin tarball can be installed with pip:
>> >
>> >   pip install apache-airflow-1.9.0alpha0+incubating-bin.tar.gz
>> >
>> > The goal is to have the community install and run this to expose any
>> bugs
>> > before we move on to official release candidates.
>> >
>> > Here are the outstanding blocker bugs for 1.9.0:
>> >
>> >   AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue
>> >   AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug         |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator are
>> marked
>> > as
>> >   AIRFLOW-1055 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run() exception
>> > for
>> > @on
>> >   AIRFLOW-1018 |Bug         |Scheduler DAG processes can not log to
>> stdout
>> >   AIRFLOW-1013 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas() exception
>> for
>> > @once
>> >   AIRFLOW-976  |Bug         |Mark success running task causes it to fail
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Chris
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.org
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Welp. Work got in the way, so I'll cut the beta on Monday. :)
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Chris Riccomini <
>> criccomini@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Works for me. Will try and cut a beta before end of week.
>> > >>
>> > >> Blockers for 1.9.0 are:
>> > >>
>> > >> AIRFLOW-1611 |Bug         |Customize logging in Airflow
>> > >> AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE issue
>> > >> AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug         |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator are
>> > marked
>> > >> as
>> > >> AIRFLOW-976  |Bug         |Mark success running task causes it to
>> fail
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Hi Chris
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Can I suggest releasing a beta? The stable branch is only cut at
RC
>> > >>> time. Betas allow us a broader exposure. It also gives us a point
of
>> > >>> reference.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> In addition the list below are mostly longer standing issues that
>> are
>> > >>> also part of the 1.8.x branch. Maybe only consider 1611, 1525,
1258,
>> > and
>> > >>> 976 as blocker?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Cheers
>> > >>> Bolke
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
>> > >>>
>> > >>> > Op 28 sep. 2017 om 19:49 heeft Chris Riccomini <
>> > criccomini@apache.org>
>> > >>> het volgende geschreven:
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > Hey all,
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > I was planning to cut a 1.9.0 stable branch and 1.9.0 beta
>> release,
>> > but
>> > >>> > seeing as there are several outstanding bugs, I'm going to
delay.
>> > Here
>> > >>> are
>> > >>> > the bugs that I'm tracking:
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-1611 |Bug         |Customize logging in Airflow
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-1525 |Improvement |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE
issue
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-1258 |Bug         |TaskInstances within SubDagOperator
are
>> > >>> marked as
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-1055 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_run()
>> > exception
>> > >>> for
>> > >>> > @on
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-1018 |Bug         |Scheduler DAG processes can not
log to
>> > >>> stdout
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-1013 |Bug         |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas()
>> exception
>> > >>> for @once
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-988  |Bug         |SLA Miss Callbacks Are Repeated
if
>> Email
>> > is
>> > >>> Not
>> > >>> > be
>> > >>> > AIRFLOW-976  |Bug         |Mark success running task causes
it to
>> > fail
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > These are the priority issues. Once they're merged, I'll cut
the
>> > >>> > v1-9-stable and beta release.
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > If you can help clean this up, that would be really appreciated.
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > Cheers,
>> > >>> > Chris
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Chris Riccomini <
>> > >>> criccomini@apache.org>
>> > >>> > wrote:
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> >> Marked it for 1.9.0.
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Charlie Jones <
>> cjones@simpli.fi>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> Is there any chance we could include AIRFLOW-988 in
1.9.0? SLA
>> > >>> callbacks
>> > >>> >>> are not working correctly without emails... Its not
a major bug,
>> > but
>> > >>> it
>> > >>> >>> does cause us some annoyance in our current deployment.
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> Link to Jira:
>> > >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-988
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> Link to PR:
>> > >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2415
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> Thanks!
>> > >>> >>> Charlie Jones
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> CHARLIE JONES
>> > >>> >>> Data Engineer
>> > >>> >>> cjones@simpli.fi  |  M: 972.821.7631
>> > >>> >>> __________________________________________________
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> Programmatic Performance.* Localized.*
>> > >>> >>> __________________________________________________
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> 1407 Texas Street  |  Suite 202  |  Fort Worth, TX
76102
>> > >>> >>> 800.840.0768  |  www.simpli.fi
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Chris Riccomini
<
>> > >>> criccomini@apache.org>
>> > >>> >>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>>> Merged.
>> > >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ryan Buckley
<
>> > >>> >>> ryan.buckley@bluecore.com>
>> > >>> >>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>>>> Would it be possible to include AIRFLOW-1587?
>> > >>> >>>>> Running dags from the UI is currently broken
on the 1.9.0
>> branch
>> > >>> due
>> > >>> >>> to
>> > >>> >>>>> this issue.
>> > >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2590
>> > >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>> Thanks,
>> > >>> >>>>> Ryan
>> > >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Driesprong,
Fokko
>> > >>> >>> <fokko@driesprong.frl
>> > >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>> Hi All,
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>> I would like to include AIRFLOW-1611 in
the 1.9.0 release:
>> > >>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2631
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>> Currently importing a custom logging configuration
is not
>> work
>> > (as
>> > >>> >>> far
>> > >>> >>>>> as I
>> > >>> >>>>>> know). Any feedback on the PR would also
be appreciated.
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>> Cheers, Fokko
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>> 2017-09-25 23:27 GMT+02:00 Chris Riccomini
<
>> > criccomini@apache.org
>> > >>> >:
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>> Done!
>> > >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Michael
Crawford <
>> > >>> >>>>>>> michael.crawford@modernizingmedicine.com>
wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> Can you slide the aws and emr
connection type fix in?
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1636
<
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1636>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2626
<
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2626>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> It keeps the connection type from
getting blanked out on
>> edit
>> > >>> >>> for
>> > >>> >>>>> these
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> types.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> Mike
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> On Sep 21, 2017, at 1:27 PM,
Chris Riccomini <
>> > >>> >>>>> criccomini@apache.org>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> Absolutely. Just cherry-picked.
I've been looking forward
>> to
>> > >>> >>>> these
>> > >>> >>>>>>> fixes!
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:23
PM, Alex Guziel <
>> > >>> >>>>> alex.guziel@airbnb.com
>> > >>> >>>>>> .
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> invalid
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> Can we get this in?
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1519
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1621
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> b6d2e0a46978e93e16576604624f57d1388814f2
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/commit/
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> 656d045e90bf67ca484a3778b2a07a419bfb324a
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> It speeds up loading times
a lot, so it's a good thing to
>> > >>> >>> have
>> > >>> >>>> in
>> > >>> >>>>>> 1.9.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at
11:14 AM, Chris Riccomini <
>> > >>> >>>>>>>> criccomini@apache.org>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good. I'll
plan on stable+beta next week, then.
>> > >>> >>> Initial
>> > >>> >>>>>>> warning
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> stands, that I will
start locking down what can get into
>> > >>> >>> 1.9.0
>> > >>> >>>> at
>> > >>> >>>>>>> that
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> point.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017
at 11:10 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
>> > >>> >>>>>> bdbruin@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No vote indeed,
just to gather feedback on a particular
>> > >>> >>> fixed
>> > >>> >>>>>> point
>> > >>> >>>>>>> in
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> time. It also
gives a bit more trust to a tarball than
>> to
>> > a
>> > >>> >>>> git
>> > >>> >>>>>>> pull.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Bolke
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Sep
2017, at 20:09, Chris Riccomini <
>> > >>> >>>>> criccomini@apache.org
>> > >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I can do a
beta. Is the process significantly
>> different?
>> > >>> >>>> IIRC,
>> > >>> >>>>>> it's
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> basically
the same, just no vote, right?
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep
20, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
>> > >>> >>>>>>> bdbruin@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you
sure you want to go ahead and do RCs right
>> away?
>> > >>> >>>>> Isn’t a
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> beta
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> a
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bit smarter?
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Bolke
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On
20 Sep 2017, at 19:41, Chris Riccomini <
>> > >>> >>>>>> criccomini@apache.org
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey
all,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
want to send out a warning that I'm planning to
>> cut
>> > >>> >>> the
>> > >>> >>>>>> stable
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> branch
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next
week, and begin the RC1 release vote. Once the
>> > >>> >>> stable
>> > >>> >>>>>> branch
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> is
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cut, I
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
be locking down what commits get cherry picked
>> > into
>> > >>> >>>> the
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> branch,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
only be doing PRs that are required to get the
>> > >>> >>> release
>> > >>> >>>>>> out.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On
Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Chris Riccomini <
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> criccomini@apache.org
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey all,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
An update on the 1.9.0 release. Here are the
>> > >>> >>> outstanding
>> > >>> >>>> PRs
>> > >>> >>>>>>> that
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> are
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
slated to be included into 1.9.0:
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ISSUE ID     |STATUS    |DESCRIPTION
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1617 |Open      |XSS Vulnerability in
>> Variable
>> > >>> >>>>>> endpoint
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1611 |Open      |Customize logging in
>> Airflow
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1605 |Reopened  |Fix log source of local
>> > >>> >>> loggers
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1604 |Open      |Rename the logger to log
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1525 |Open      |Fix minor LICENSE & NOTICE
>> > >>> >>> issue
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1499 |In Progres|Eliminate duplicate and
>> > >>> >>> unneeded
>> > >>> >>>>> code
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1198 |Open      |HDFSOperator to operate
>> HDFS
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1055 |Open
>> |airflow/jobs.py:create_dag_ru
>> > >>> >>> n()
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> exception
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> for
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@on
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1019 |Open      |active_dagruns shouldn't
>> > >>> >>> include
>> > >>> >>>>>> paused
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> DAGs
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1018 |Open      |Scheduler DAG processes
>> can
>> > >>> >>> not
>> > >>> >>>> log
>> > >>> >>>>>> to
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>> stdout
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1015 |Open      |TreeView displayed over
>> task
>> > >>> >>>>>> instances
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-1013 |Open
>> |airflow/jobs.py:manage_slas()
>> > >>> >>>>>> exception
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> for
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@once
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-976  |Open      |Mark success running task
>> > >>> >>> causes
>> > >>> >>>> it
>> > >>> >>>>>> to
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> fail
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-914  |Open      |Refactor
>> > >>> >>>>>> BackfillJobTest.test_backfill_
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> examples
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
to
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-913  |Open      |Refactor
>> > >>> >>>>>> tests.CoreTest.test_scheduler_
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> job
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
real
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-912  |Open      |Refactor tests and build
>> > >>> >>> matrix
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-888  |Open      |Operators should not push
>> > >>> >>> XComs
>> > >>> >>>> by
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> default
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-828  |Open      |Add maximum size for XComs
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-825  |Open      |Add Dataflow semantics
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
AIRFLOW-788  |Open      |Context unexpectedly
>> added to
>> > >>> >>>> hive
>> > >>> >>>>>> conf
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I will be locking down what can get cherry-picked
>> into
>> > >>> >>> the
>> > >>> >>>>>> 1.9.0
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
shortly, so if you have something you want in,
>> please
>> > >>> >>> set
>> > >>> >>>>> the
>> > >>> >>>>>>> fix
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
to 1.9.0.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We (at WePay) have deployed 1.9.0 into our dev
>> > cluster,
>> > >>> >>>> and
>> > >>> >>>>> it
>> > >>> >>>>>>> has
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> been
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
running smoothly for several days.
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
** I could really use help verifying stability. If
>> you
>> > >>> >>> run
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> Airflow,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
in your best interest to deploy the 1.9.0 test
>> branch
>> > >>> >>>>>> somewhere,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>> and
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> verify
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
it's working for your workload. **
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Cheers,
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Chris
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message