airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Driesprong, Fokko" <fo...@driesprong.frl>
Subject Re: Proposal: Automatically mark stale PRs in github
Date Tue, 02 Jul 2019 06:29:24 GMT
Great work Jarek. I think the stalebot is a great addition. Even if an
issue gets closed unresolved, it is an indication to me that the issue
might not be relevant. In the end you can always reopen issues again.

Cheers, Fokko

Op di 2 jul. 2019 om 07:41 schreef Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>

> If we finally find out why stale bot does not work - the issue is still not
> solved - stale bot has a number of feature that make management of the
> issues easy. And it is super-lightweight and helps to work in a
> community-compatible way. No need to have single person managing everything
> as long as we agree to some simple rules. Stale bot works with comments and
> labels and it actually implements fairly natural workflow of an issue and
> you can see from the comment history the whole context of what was going
> on.
>
> 1) stale comments x days (7 by default)  in advance that an issue is going
> to be closed. I am looking through comments in our github but I have also
> some rules to flag important mails (Gmail is great for that). You can
> easily have stale bot messages surface up.
> 2) A comment on issue is enough to keep it active for another stale time
> (60 days by default) - a committer can pig the person responsible and that
> is enough to defer stale status for next 60 days.
> 3) You can set a label on important issues/pulls so that it never get stale
> ("pinned", "security" are default ones but we can choose our own)
> 4) You can limit the stale bot to only "issues", "pulls" or have both
>
> So all-in-all - I think we could work out a pretty decent stale
> configuration and follow a simple set of rules.
>
> But we need to find out what is updating our issues regularly first. The
> issue (
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/INFRA/issues/INFRA-18589?filter=reportedbyme
> )
> is still not solved.
>
> J.
>
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 11:57 AM Kaxil Naik <kaxilnaik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Don't know if we can configure the stable to ping the commiters (not all
> > but some) twice before closing a PR.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019, 15:25 Ash Berlin-Taylor <ash@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > An example of why I'm not a _huge_ van of stale bot, at least not for
> > > issues.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/dpgaspar/Flask-AppBuilder/issues/685
> > >
> > > That is still an issue but was closed just because no one responded to
> > it.
> > >
> > > > On 11 Jun 2019, at 06:50, Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This issue bugs me a lot. Pretty much all our PRs were updated 2 days
> > ago
> > > > again :(
> > > >
> > > > I've opened the ticket to Apache Infrastructure
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18589 and I hope we can
> > get
> > > to
> > > > the bottom of it. I believe it might be some integration we have
> (but I
> > > > have no access to it). I looked at other Apache repositories and they
> > do
> > > > not have similar "updates" happening, so it must be something
> specific
> > > for
> > > > apache/airflow repo.
> > > >
> > > > J.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:41 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Well. Github support is quite far from being helpful :(. We'll have
> to
> > > dig
> > > >> deeper on our own it seems
> > > >>
> > > >> Our apologies for the wait, and thank you for getting in touch! Due
> > to a
> > > >> high volume of requests, we are currently experiencing much longer
> > than
> > > >> average response times here in Support. You asked:
> > > >>
> > > >> Can you please let us know what action caused the update and what
> can
> > we
> > > >> do to prevent it from happening again ?
> > > >>
> > > >> The updated_at for any object, including users, will change whenever
> > the
> > > >> database record for that object is updated. Such database updates
> can
> > > >> happen for many reasons, though we don't have a complete list of
> those
> > > to
> > > >> share with you and your team. We wish could be of more help here as
> we
> > > see
> > > >> how this can be a problem for you and your team, but we don't
> > currently
> > > >> have any other insight to share at this time.
> > > >>
> > > >> Please let us know how else we can be of help!
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 1:14 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> All our PRs were updated again on Wednesday, 15th of May. I am
> > > following
> > > >>> up with Github support (they have not responded so far).
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Maybe someone happens to know what could have caused the update
> (some
> > > >>> automated job? bot? CI?). There is absolutely no update visible
in
> > the
> > > UI
> > > >>> of github for those. I also looked at the fork in some cases -
> > nothing
> > > >>> changed for those either.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Or maybe someone has contact at Github so that they verify/fix
it
> > > faster
> > > >>> ? They must be able to see from the logs what happened to those
> PRs -
> > > from
> > > >>> our point of view looks like most of those PRs were not touched
for
> > > several
> > > >>> months.
> > > >>> I responded to them with this (the ticket number is 159141).
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hello GitHub support,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> We continue to have the same problem. Pretty much all our PR were
> > > updated
> > > >>> again 4 days ago - which prevents stalebot from closing them.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Example here: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/4635  - this
> PR
> > > was
> > > >>> last touched 3 months ago, yet when we list it with this query
> > https://
> > > >>> github
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> .com/apache/airflow/pulls?page=5&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A%3C2019-05-16+sort%3Aupdated-desc&utf8=%E2%9C%93
> > > it
> > > >>> shows as updated 4 days ago (i.e. on Wed 15th of May). I cannot
> find
> > > any
> > > >>> indicatio of a change that could have caused the update date to
be
> > > bumped
> > > >>> again.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Can you please let us know what action caused the update and what
> can
> > > we
> > > >>> do to prevent it from happening again ?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> J.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 3:54 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> I raised an issue with Github. Let's see what they say:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Jarek,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thank you for contacting GitHub Developer Support. We wanted
to
> let
> > > you
> > > >>>> know that we've received your message and will get to it as
> quickly
> > as
> > > >>>> possible.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Ticket ID: 159141
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> We've also included a copy of your message below.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> If you have any additional information or would like to add
> anything
> > > to
> > > >>>> your initial message, now would be a great time to do so,
feel
> free
> > to
> > > >>>> reply to this email. If not, then rest assured your request
is in
> > the
> > > right
> > > >>>> hands :)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thank you!
> > > >>>> The GitHub Developer Support Team
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> *Jarek Potiuk*
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> May 6, 1:47 PM UTC
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Hello All,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> In Apache Airflow project we are trying to use stalebot to
closed
> > > >>>> not-updated pull requests. And for some reason the bot does
not
> > really
> > > >>>> closed our old tickets. We checked what could be wrong and
it
> seems
> > > that
> > > >>>> pretty much all our PRs get somehow updated regularly.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Last time I checked more than 100 PRs were updated at 27th
of
> April
> > > and
> > > >>>> yesterday I checked that 118 requests were updated on 28th
of
> April.
> > > It
> > > >>>> does not seem that there was any action that could have caused
the
> > > updates.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Here are all the requests (all of them updated 27th of April):
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A%3C2019-04-28+sort%3Aupdated-desc+
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> And here is an example PR that was updated 27th of April but
there
> > > seem
> > > >>>> to be no action that could have caused it:
> > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/4929
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Can you please explain where the updates are coming from and
how
> we
> > > can
> > > >>>> avoid the updates from happening?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 3:39 AM Jiajie Zhong <
> > > zhongjiajie955@hotmail.com>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> It's really odd. I don't know this issue. I think maybe
travis-c
> > > update
> > > >>>>> our PR time at first but it don't.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> BTW, I take a look on some PR and give some example.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/5135 create 17
days ago,
> > last
> > > >>>>> comment 16 days ago, and travis-ci finish 17 days ago
(which mean
> > > that CI
> > > >>>>> process don't touch it and change PR update time)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/5136
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Best wish.
> > > >>>>> -- Jiajie
> > > >>>>> ________________________________
> > > >>>>> From: Jarek Potiuk <Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com>
> > > >>>>> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 4:04
> > > >>>>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> > > >>>>> Cc: airflowuser
> > > >>>>> Subject: Re: Proposal: Automatically mark stale PRs in
github
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I believe our current stale bot configuration does not
work. And
> I
> > do
> > > >>>>> not
> > > >>>>> know the reason yet, which worries me :(
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> There is something really strange going on with our PRs
and their
> > > >>>>> updated
> > > >>>>> date. Again pretty much all the PRs were mysteriously
updated on
> > > *27th
> > > >>>>> of
> > > >>>>> April - 8 days ago* (similarly as the previous case where
I saw
> all
> > > PRs
> > > >>>>> updated on *6th of April*).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> You can see it here:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> * there are just 2(!) PRs updated before 27th of April:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A%3C2019-04-27+sort%3Aupdated-desc+
> > > >>>>> * there are 120 (!) PRS updated before 28th of April:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A%3C2019-04-28+sort%3Aupdated-desc+
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> There is no indication that most of those impacted issues
were at
> > all
> > > >>>>> touched on 27th or 28th of April. If you look at random
PRs
> there,
> > > most
> > > >>>>> of
> > > >>>>> them were commented latest at the beginning of April.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Looks like 8 days ago some process has bumped the update
date for
> > > most
> > > >>>>> of
> > > >>>>> our PRs. With this kind of "regular" (it seems) process
of
> marking
> > > the
> > > >>>>> requests "updated" our stale bot is useless.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Does anyone have an idea why it might have happened?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I am quite puzzled by this one. I am going to open an
issue to
> > Github
> > > >>>>> support if no one has an idea what's going on.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> J.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:39 PM Jiajie Zhong <
> > > >>>>> zhongjiajie955@hotmail.com>
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I think we should change stale-bot strategy to auto
close PR, If
> > 30
> > > >>>>> days
> > > >>>>>> is too short for contributions, is 60 or 90 days make
sence?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> In addition, I notice that we have some PR pass CI
but none
> review
> > > it
> > > >>>>> or
> > > >>>>>> let a suggest on it. So could we add a bot auto remind
committer
> > if
> > > >>>>> PR pass
> > > >>>>>> CI but no one review?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Or remind author if CI failed?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Does it make sence?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Best wish.
> > > >>>>>> -- Jiajie
> > > >>>>>> ________________________________
> > > >>>>>> From: airflowuser <airflowuser@protonmail.com.INVALID>
> > > >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 16:39
> > > >>>>>> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: Proposal: Automatically mark stale PRs
in github
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Since there are many many open PRs in the repo it
can be hard
> for
> > > >>>>>> committers to keep track (I think that you are keeping
tack by
> the
> > > >>>>> mailing
> > > >>>>>> list which sometimes can easily be missed).
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> It may be easier to tack using the filter of recently
updated
> (see
> > > >>>>> image)
> > > >>>>>> I hoped that some day this will be the default order
of PRs.
> That
> > > way
> > > >>>>>> activity in a PR from the last page would bump it
to the front.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > > >>>>>> On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 11:32 AM, Ash Berlin-Taylor
<
> > > >>>>> ash@apache.org>
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> As a user/reporter on other opensource projects
I would
> > personally
> > > >>>>> see
> > > >>>>>> auto-close after 30 days to be far too aggressive
to the point
> of
> > > >>>>> being
> > > >>>>>> unfriendly to contributions.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Unless we get markedly better at merging PRs I
wouldn't want to
> > see
> > > >>>>> us
> > > >>>>>> mark as stale so quickly.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> -ash
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> On 22 Apr 2019, at 22:07, Jarek Potiuk
> Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> Here is a better search showing all the 103
issues - all of
> them
> > > >>>>>> "updated"
> > > >>>>>>>> 17 days ago
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?page=1&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A
> > > >>>>>> <2019-04-06+sort%3Aupdated-desc
> > > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 11:06 PM Jarek Potiuk
> > > >>>>> Jarek.Potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> I think current stalebot configuration
will not help us for
> > > >>>>> quite a
> > > >>>>>> while
> > > >>>>>>>>> for mysterious reason.
> > > >>>>>>>>> I looked at the current PRs and somehow
mysteriously vast
> > > >>>>> majority of
> > > >>>>>>>>> issues (even issues last-commented in
2017) have been updated
> > 17
> > > >>>>>> days ago.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > >
> >
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/19GF1fdpYa2Tf25N3XgAEKrdXBwr9mNH9/view?usp=sharing
> > > >>>>>>>>> It looks like they were all updated on
6th of April, at 00:13
> > > >>>>> CEST.
> > > >>>>>>>>> There are 103 such issues:
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=✓&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A
> <https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A>
> > <
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A
> >
> > > <
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A
> > >
> > > >>>>> <
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A
> > > >
> > > >>>>>> <
> > > >>>>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+updated%3A
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> <2019-04-06+.
> > > >>>>>>>>> It would be nice to find out why this
happened.
> > > >>>>>>>>> From stalebot documentation: "Any change
to an issues and
> pull
> > > >>>>>> request is
> > > >>>>>>>>> considered an update, including comments,
changing labels,
> > > >>>>> applying
> > > >>>>>> or
> > > >>>>>>>>> removing milestones, or pushing commits.".
I think none of
> that
> > > >>>>>> happened to
> > > >>>>>>>>> most of the 103 issues (i checked a few
and could not find
> any
> > > >>>>> trace
> > > >>>>>> of any
> > > >>>>>>>>> such changes). But maybe someone can recall
something that
> > > >>>>> happened
> > > >>>>>> 6th of
> > > >>>>>>>>> April around midnight (Saturday).
> > > >>>>>>>>> Current configuration of stalebot (.github/stalebot.yaml)
> says:
> > > >>>>> 45
> > > >>>>>> days
> > > >>>>>>>>> (mark as stakle) and further 7 days (closing).
So those
> issues
> > > >>>>> will
> > > >>>>>> be
> > > >>>>>>>>> marked as stale by the stalebot around
May 20th (providing
> that
> > > >>>>> such
> > > >>>>>> update
> > > >>>>>>>>> won't happen again).
> > > >>>>>>>>> Maybe then we can set it to 20 days +
7 for now to stale most
> > > >>>>> issues
> > > >>>>>> up
> > > >>>>>>>>> in 3 days and delete them 10 days from
now? If the config
> will
> > > >>>>> be too
> > > >>>>>>>>> aggressive we can change it back after
the 103 issues are
> > > >>>>> cleaned-up.
> > > >>>>>>>>> J.
> > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 7:54 AM airflowuser
> > > >>>>>>>>> airflowuser@protonmail.com.invalid wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> It's already on (or at least was on
in December 2018).
> > > >>>>>>>>>> In any case here is a list of old
PRs that are waiting for
> > > >>>>>> committers.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1956] Add parameter whether
the navbar clock time
> is
> > > >>>>> UTC
> > > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/2906
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Status: ash commented but there are
no further instructions.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-620] Feature to tail custom
number of logs instead
> of
> > > >>>>>> rendering
> > > >>>>>>>>>> whole log
> > > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/3992
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Status: Pushed changed in Jan 2019
that were not reviewed
> > > >>>>>>>>>> AIRFLOW-3149 Support dataproc cluster
deletion on ERROR
> > > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/4064
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Status: pushed changes today. CI passed.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1424] make the next execution
date of DAGs visible
> > > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/2460
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Status: not sure. Waiting for ash
?
> > > >>>>>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1488] Add the TriggeredDagRunSensor
operator
> > > >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/4291
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Status: Waiting for code review
> > > >>>>>>>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 18, 2019 12:01
AM, Daniel Imberman <
> > > >>>>>>>>>> dimberman.opensource@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> As part of our effort to reduce
the PR backlog I wanted to
> > > >>>>>> proposed that
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> we set the github stale action
> > > >>>>> https://github.com/apps/stale.
> > > >>>>>> This will
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> allow us to temporarily close
PRs/tickets that are not
> > > >>>>> actively
> > > >>>>>> being
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> worked on.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> (note that this will not remove
PRs, it will simply mark
> > > >>>>> PRs as
> > > >>>>>> stale to
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> make it easier for committers)
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >>>>>>>>> Polidea https://www.polidea.com/ | Principal
Software
> Engineer
> > > >>>>>>>>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >>>>>>>>> E: jarek.potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >>>>>>>> Polidea https://www.polidea.com/ | Principal
Software
> Engineer
> > > >>>>>>>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >>>>>>>> E: jarek.potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >>>>> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software
Engineer
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >>>>> E: jarek.potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> --
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >>>> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software
Engineer
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >>>> E: jarek.potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >>> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software
Engineer
> > > >>>
> > > >>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >>> E: jarek.potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> Jarek Potiuk
> > > >> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
> > > >>
> > > >> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > >> E: jarek.potiuk@polidea.com
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Jarek Potiuk
> > > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Jarek Potiuk
> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
>
> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
>

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