Indeed it's a huge effort Jarek, Looking forward to testing it.. :) Regards, Pavan
On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 11:08 PM Jens Scheffler <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jarek, > > thanks for putting all the efforts in making a 2.11.1! I am looking > forward and promise to contribute testing! > > Jens > > On 13.02.26 22:24, Jarek Potiuk wrote: > > Hello here, > > > > Another milestone (it does take a bit longer than I anticipated .. > > estimation and guessing is difficult when you have ): > > > > * we have a green v2-11-test build with all tests passing for all > databases > > - including sqlite. The constraints for 2-11 have been updated today > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/commits/constraints-2-11/ (two times) > - > > and the dependencies are "refreshed" > > * i reviewed/merged all remaining PRs / Issues that were marked for 2.11 > > from those people who submitted them (in the past and recently) - that > also > > includes some rework to make those "better" and handle more edge-cases > > * I opened last three PRs that were outstanding from past discussions > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/milestone/114 -> and look forward to > > reviews/making them green/merging > > > > Once this is done I will make an RC for airflow 2.11.1 and fab provider > > 1.5.4 that should be tested together. > > > > I have a kind request to everyone who is looking forward to 2.11.1 - to > get > > prepared for testing next week, I am planning to have the voting/testing > > open for 5 days, in order to get more feedback and potential issue > > resolving time. > > > > The whole experience with 2.11.1 for me is kind of proof of the "if > > sometimes is painful - do it more often" - many months passed from > > releasing 2.11.0 and this caused a natural decay .. and bringing it back > to > > a fresh state is really, really painful. > > > > J. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 2:08 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hello Everyone. I am almost done with all the tests and fixes and > >> preparation for RC candidates. The last PR > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61633 solves the stability db > >> connection issues with flask-session (still have some sqlite test issues > >> but it's a nuance). > >> > >> I will be proceeding with preparing the release and adding a few last > >> "dependency/security" related fixes tomorrow. > >> > >> I am also going to merge very few, very small and targeted (and safe to > >> merge) fixes - such as https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61644 . I > >> aim to make an RC in the next few days. > >> > >> But If you have any (very small) backport fix that you would like to get > >> to v2-11-test to fix it in 2.11.1 -> please open a PR against > "v2-11-test" > >> and let me know - ping me on slack ideally. However I have a request > there > >> - I will tag those who made those PRs and I will expect that they will > test > >> them in their system while we are testing RC candidates. > >> > >> J, > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Feb 7, 2026 at 4:41 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Hello here. > >>> > >>> I just achieved a significant milestone. > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 which I worked on for > 2.11 > >>> got green finally (it took quite a bit more effort than I expected). > >>> > >>> There is still at least one issue I am working on and few "backports" > to > >>> male but I wanted to get the 2-11-test to the state where the CI is > green > >>> so that subsequent fixes can be merged with tests and usual process. In > >>> order to make reviews easier - I split the big PR I worked on into > several > >>> smaller ones focused on groups of changes that will be easier to > review and > >>> approve (hopefully). I also added appropriate people - I think as > >>> reviewers, so please take a look at reviewing those quickly. It is > >>> **UNLIKELY** that those PRs will get green on their own - but once we > merge > >>> them all, the 51681 is proof that this will happen eventually. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> * Synchronize GitHub workflows and Breeze tooling for 2.11 branch: > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61598 > >>> * Synchronize FAB provider with 1.5.4 version > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61601 > >>> * Synchronize common compat to 1.2.1 in v2-11-test branch > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61602 > >>> > >>> Please review (and approve ?) so I can proceed.. > >>> > >>> J, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 11:29 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Interesting that you ask now - I literally am working on in as you > speak > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 5:28 PM Damian Shaw < > [email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> What's the current thinking on a 2.11.1? > >>>>> > >>>>> Totally understandable if this was too much work and has been > dropped, > >>>>> but just trying to gauge what advice I should giving to cautious > upgraded > >>>>> on a path to Airflow 3.x. > >>>>> > >>>>> Damian > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > >>>>> Sent: Sunday, October 5, 2025 3:44 AM > >>>>> To: [email protected] > >>>>> Subject: Upcoming Airflow 2.11.1 release [was: [DISCUSS] Possible > >>>>> Werkzeug vulnerabilities fix for Airflow 2] > >>>>> > >>>>> Hello here, > >>>>> > >>>>> *TL;DR; I wanted to start a process of preparing to 2.11.1 release > and > >>>>> I would like the community to be aware of it as I am taking the role > of > >>>>> release manager for it. * > >>>>> > >>>>> I will need help with reviewing PRs from the committers (I will try > to > >>>>> move it forward even during the Summit, but realistically speaking, > I think > >>>>> I will start release process some time after the Summit as likely a > lot of > >>>>> us won't have the usual attention/time. > >>>>> > >>>>> *First: good news.* We are unblocked with long overdue Werkzeug > upgrade > >>>>> - with a serious vulnerabiity (via Connexion 2.15.0) - there are > also few > >>>>> small security-related patches that we want to implement alongside. > >>>>> > >>>>> *Then: not so good news* (well, depends for whom): while we are going > >>>>> to release 2.11.1, this is is going to be **critical bugfixes only + > >>>>> security** release. There will be absolutely no new features, or > fixes > >>>>> to - even annoying - issues in 2.11 if they are not critical. > >>>>> > >>>>> You can skip the rest of the message if you are not interested in > more > >>>>> details or do not want to be involved in the 2.11.1 release testing. > >>>>> > >>>>> *MORE DETAILS:* > >>>>> > >>>>> *Again - what is going to be included?* > >>>>> > >>>>> Only absolutely critical issues and security related changes. > >>>>> > >>>>> If you think there is an absolutely critical fix that should be > >>>>> included - please let me know and explain why - here in this > discussion. > >>>>> But the approach I am going to take is that only absolutely critical/ > >>>>> security related fixes should be included in this release - and > there has > >>>>> to be a really good justification to fix anything in 2.11. > >>>>> > >>>>> I will also absolutely expect, that whoever wants to get any fix > there > >>>>> and we will agree here that it's a good idea, it's **on the one who > proposes > >>>>> it** to make a green PR to v2-11-test with the fix and that they 100% > >>>>> commit to testing and verifying it when the release candidate is out. > >>>>> > >>>>> If you think that something should be included in 2.11.1 because of > >>>>> security reasons - please do not write about it in public. Send an > email to > >>>>> [email protected] explaining the issue and ideally > solution > >>>>> / PR to backport. Generally follow our Security Policy > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/security/policy > >>>>> > >>>>> *Help needed* > >>>>> > >>>>> Eventually - I will need community help in testing it - especially > for > >>>>> authentication/FAB integration because this part will be changed a > bit. I > >>>>> will ask for a bit longer time of testing likely and will need > community > >>>>> support from people who are already at 2.11.0 to test it. > >>>>> > >>>>> *A little more details on wha triggered it* > >>>>> > >>>>> It took a LOONG time, but finally - with help of some friends of mine > >>>>> who did a little nudging and conveniently just before coming back > from my > >>>>> vacations - which will happen on Monday BTW - we finally have > Connexion > >>>>> 2.15.0 released. This was a bit of a blocker that we waited for - > this > >>>>> **should** help us to solve one of the longest standing issue with > >>>>> Werkzeug dependency version of ours having a critical vulnerability. > >>>>> > >>>>> I think (that was few months ago) I fixed all the compatibility > issues > >>>>> for Airflow 2.11. > >>>>> > >>>>> It was done some time ago on a version of Connexion built from a > branch > >>>>> and it required a few changes (the way how percent encoding of urls > are > >>>>> handled by Werkzeug 2.3.0 and few internal things + i had to > implement a > >>>>> bit of a "hack" on Serialization in flask-session, this PR > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 - should likely > >>>>> eventually lead to a green build. > >>>>> > >>>>> *A little more details on what is going to happen* > >>>>> > >>>>> I will need to do a few more steps to get there: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1) I need to release Fab provider 1.5.4 (initially beta, but when I > get > >>>>> it > >>>>> tested) from providers/fab/v1-5 (working on it). This is needed to > >>>>> "unblock" some of the depenendency limits in 1.5.3 and adapt > provider to a > >>>>> new flask-session that is needed for the upgrade.. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2) I will continue with the "connexion-2.15" PR > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 to use this new > provider > >>>>> version, get constraints generated - and **hopefullly** get > v2-11-test > >>>>> branch green (might require some tweaks to the old branches - they > are a > >>>>> bit rusty I am afraid) > >>>>> > >>>>> 3) then I will apply remaining critical changes, That will be the > time > >>>>> when anyone who thinks a change should be included, should work on > >>>>> backporting critical/implementing security related PRs. > >>>>> > >>>>> What this will allow (fingers crossed it will not be too difficult) - > >>>>> is to release 2.11.1 version of Airflow with bumped Werkzeug and few > other > >>>>> dependencies, and critical changes that we plan for 2.11.1 - > following the > >>>>> regular release process. > >>>>> > >>>>> J. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 8:55 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Good news. As a result of our request, Connection 2.15.0rc2 was > >>>>>> released in PyPI this morning with Flask>3. I am running now tests > >>>>>> with it > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 and we **finally** > have > >>>>>> non-conflicting dependencies in Airflow 2.11 with it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It still fails - i.e. we will have to fix things with session > handling > >>>>>> (we knew we will have to do it because of flask-session upgrade) but > >>>>>> this is something we are now unblocked with :). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hopefully soon we will get rid of the Werkzeug drama. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> root@a20ed58d4f59:/opt/airflow# pip freeze | grep lask > >>>>>> Flask==2.3.3 > >>>>>> Flask-AppBuilder==4.5.2 > >>>>>> Flask-Babel==2.0.0 > >>>>>> Flask-Bcrypt==1.0.1 > >>>>>> Flask-Caching==2.3.1 > >>>>>> Flask-JWT-Extended==4.7.1 > >>>>>> Flask-Limiter==3.11.0 > >>>>>> Flask-Login==0.6.3 > >>>>>> Flask-Session==0.8.0 > >>>>>> Flask-SQLAlchemy==2.5.1 > >>>>>> Flask-WTF==1.2.2 > >>>>>> root@a20ed58d4f59:/opt/airflow# pip freeze | grep erkzeug > >>>>>> *Werkzeug==3.1.3* > >>>>>> root@a20ed58d4f59:/opt/airflow# > >>>>>> > >>>>>> J. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 7:44 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> Dear Airflow community, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thank you. You are amazing. With all the upvotes and comments we > had > >>>>>>> the contributor of connexion working on bringing Flask 2.3.3+ back > to > >>>>>>> the upcoming Connexion release > >>>>>>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/2058/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Particularly Kamil - thanks for the thoughtful comments and the > >>>>>>> diligent check on what Flask version we need. We are currently at > 2.2 > >>>>>>> in Airflow 2.11 but I checked that if Connexion sets their limit to > >>>>>>>> =2.3.3, we should be able update to that version in 2.11 (and it's > >>>>>>> good in general as 2.3+ is now the only recommended branch still > >>>>>>> being "supported" for Flask 2 for security issues it seems. So we > get > >>>>>>> additional benefit there that we will be less likely to hit similar > >>>>> issues until Airflow 2 EOL. > >>>>>>> J. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 8:07 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Thank you Kamil - that's very thoughtful and nice to see your > >>>>>>>> message back on the devlist :D > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 7:38 PM Kamil Breguła <[email protected] > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I proposed to split the new connexion release into two versions. > >>>>>>>>> First release one release that supports the new Werkzereg > release, > >>>>>>>>> and then release a new Connexion release that supports Flask 3 > >>>>>>>>> only. This is not ideal, because Airflow 2 will still be on an > >>>>>>>>> unsupported version of Connexion, but we will have at least one > >>>>>>>>> release that has the new Werkzeug version and has a fix for the > CVE > >>>>>>>>> bug. This might be easier to do, as I understand that connexion > >>>>>>>>> might not want to support Flask 2 if there is no specific end > date > >>>>>>>>> for when other dependencies will support Flask 3, but it may > still > >>>>>>>>> turn out to be enough for us. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> śr., 18 cze 2025 o 08:54 Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> > >>>>> napisał(a): > >>>>>>>>>> I WOULD LIKE TO TAP INTO POWER OF OUR COMMUNITY... PLEASE HELP. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> We again had another issue with FAB where the root cause was our > >>>>>>>>>> old Werkzeug version - that we cannot upgrade until now) - old > >>>>>>>>>> Werkzeug > >>>>>>>>> does > >>>>>>>>>> not support `scrypt` hashing algorithm and latest FAB version > >>>>>>>>> defaulted > >>>>>>>>>> password hashing to scrypt - we have a workaround but we will > >>>>>>>>>> have to > >>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>> a more complete fix with FAB provider. And I am sure Airflow 2 > >>>>>>>>>> users > >>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>>> have more and more problems as the time passes. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I think there is a **real** chance with the Connexion team > >>>>>>>>>> working on > >>>>>>>>>> 2.15.0 - https://pypi.org/project/connexion/2.15.0rc1/ that we > >>>>>>>>>> can finally get rid of it - in Both Airflow 2 and Airflow 3. But > >>>>>>>>>> we have one > >>>>>>>>> problem -> > >>>>>>>>>> Connexion 2.15.0rc1 seems to require Flask 3 where we cannot > >>>>>>>>>> upgrade > >>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>> Flask 3 because of the FAB <3 limit. I started a discussion > about > >>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>> here: > >>>>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/1992#issuecomment-2976 > >>>>>>>>> 706491 > >>>>>>>>>> and explained that it would be great if Connexion 2.15.0 > >>>>>>>>>> supported > >>>>>>>>> still > >>>>>>>>>> flask 2. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> And it would be great if more people could support it and > explain > >>>>>>>>> that this > >>>>>>>>>> would be a major win for the Airflow community if they could > >>>>>>>>>> relax > >>>>>>>>> this. > >>>>>>>>>> I do not think this is a big problem for them - the explanation > >>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>> had from > >>>>>>>>>> them is "hey Flask 2 is really old" - but there is no "real" > >>>>> reason. > >>>>>>>>>> On the other hand migrating FAB to Flask 3 would like be a very > >>>>>>>>> complex and > >>>>>>>>>> risky thing (and Daniel already struggles with just SQLalchemy > >>>>>>>>> upgrade and > >>>>>>>>>> FAB 5 so it would be too much to put the pressure on him). > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Can you please help and upvote/comment on > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/1992#issuecomment-2976 > >>>>>>>>> 706491 > >>>>>>>>>> I would (and the whole community) really, really appreciate it. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> J. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 11:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected] > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> As you might know, Airflow 2 has a long-time issue with not > >>>>>>>>>>> being > >>>>>>>>> able to > >>>>>>>>>>> upgrade Werkzeug dependency to a non-vulnerable version and > >>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>> raises a > >>>>>>>>>>> lot of alarms for users who run CVE checks on Airflow. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We've been waiting for a long time for that - but it looks like > >>>>>>>>> there is > >>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>> light in a tunnel. We have two options that we can attempt: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Connexion 2.15.0.rc1 > >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Releasing a package that will patch Werkzeug 2.2.3 with > >>>>>>>>> backported CVE > >>>>>>>>>>> fixes > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Recently Google team attempted to back-port and test fixes to > >>>>>>>>>>> older version of Werkzeug and I helped to get through to the > >>>>>>>>>>> maintainers - > >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/discussions/3034 - however > >>>>>>>>> they are > >>>>>>>>>>> not really willing to make that into regular release - > >>>>>>>>>>> reasoning > >>>>>>>>>> explained > >>>>>>>>>>> in the discussion. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> However, after many months of discussions and at least 3 > >>>>>>>>>>> attempts > >>>>>>>>> to bump > >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies for Connexion - we seem to have an RC candidate > >>>>>>>>> (2.15.0rc1 > >>>>>>>>>>> https://pypi.org/project/connexion/2.15.0rc1/) that lifts the > >>>>>>>>> limit for > >>>>>>>>>>> Werkzeug (released 4 days ago). > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There were some breaking changes in Werkzeug that made it so > >>>>>>>>>>> long > >>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>> difficult but I think we should be able to release a 2.11.1 > >>>>>>>>>>> version > >>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>> Airflow with it > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I made first attempt to migrate - here: > >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 and while I was > >>>>>>>>>>> able > >>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>> work > >>>>>>>>>>> out non-conflicting dependencies and bump Werkzeug, there are > >>>>>>>>>>> some > >>>>>>>>> things > >>>>>>>>>>> to be fixed with session handling and there is still one > >>>>>>>>>>> outstanding problem - FAB requires Flask < 3 and currently > >>>>>>>>>>> Connexion 2.0.15rc1 > >>>>>>>>>> requires > >>>>>>>>>>> flask >= 3 - which FAB (even upcoming FAB 5) does not support. > >>>>>>>>>>> And > >>>>>>>>> likely > >>>>>>>>>>> migrating to Flask 3 is **not** an option for us anyway. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I started discussion here with those who worked on the > >>>>>>>>>>> Connexion > >>>>>>>>> patch > >>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>> Werkzeug to see if that is a "hard" limit..: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/1992#issuecomment-2969 > >>>>>>>>> 565640 > >>>>>>>>>>> Alternative option - patch package: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We also have a "last-resort" approach that we are looking at > >>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> Google team. We might want to release a "werkzeug-patch" > >>>>>>>>>>> package > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>>>> apply the CVE patches to Werkzeug 2.2.3 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Option 1) is not clear yet if it is possible due to Flask 3 / > >>>>>>>>>>> Flask > >>>>>>>>> 2 - > >>>>>>>>>>> and it would only work for 2.11.1 - we need to make some fixes > >>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>> change > >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies for Airflow to make it work. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Option 2) Is hacky (I am talking to Werkzeug maintainers what > >>>>>>>>>>> do > >>>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>>>> think about it as we would likely need to have at least a > >>>>>>>>>>> comment > >>>>>>>>> in the > >>>>>>>>>>> CVE advisory that this package fixes it as well) . But it has > >>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> benefit > >>>>>>>>>>> that it will **just work** by installing the patch on basically > >>>>>>>>>>> all > >>>>>>>>> past > >>>>>>>>>>> Airflow versions > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Just wanted to let everyone know it happens and ask if you have > >>>>>>>>>>> any opinions on those. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> J. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> ________________________________ > >>>>> Strike Technologies, LLC (“Strike”) is part of the GTS family of > >>>>> companies. Strike is a technology solutions provider, and is not a > broker > >>>>> or dealer and does not transact any securities related business > directly > >>>>> whatsoever. This communication is the property of Strike and its > >>>>> affiliates, and does not constitute an offer to sell or the > solicitation of > >>>>> an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction. It is intended > only for > >>>>> the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that > is > >>>>> privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. > >>>>> Distribution or copying of this communication, or the information > contained > >>>>> herein, by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. > If you > >>>>> have received this communication in error, please immediately notify > Strike > >>>>> at [email protected], and delete and destroy any copies > >>>>> hereof. > >>>>> ________________________________ > >>>>> > >>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY / PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any > >>>>> attachments are intended solely for the addressee. This transmission > is > >>>>> covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C > ''2510-2521. > >>>>> The information contained in this transmission is confidential in > nature > >>>>> and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. > 106-102, > >>>>> 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to attorney-client or > other > >>>>> legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any > purpose > >>>>> other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited, > and may > >>>>> subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. > If you > >>>>> are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please DESTROY > ALL > >>>>> COPIES RECEIVED and confirm destruction to the sender via return > >>>>> transmittal. > >>>>> > >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
