I have resolved GEODE-5254 Dale
> On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <n...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These tickets have > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open / > unresolved. > > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg] > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton] > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton] > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen] > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery] > > GEODE-4794 - [Sai] > GEODE-5594 - [Sai] > > Regards > Nabarun Nag > > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email comes >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut. >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from 1.8.0 >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release >> >> GEODE-5671 >> GEODE-5662 >> GEODE-5660 >> GEODE-5652 >> >> Regards >> Nabarun Nag >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature to gfsh. >>> This needs to be added to the documentation. >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready. >>> >>> Regards >>> Nabarun >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <amurm...@pivotal.io> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release at this >>>> point? >>>> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳 >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda < >>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have the >>>> code >>>>> ready. >>>>> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is >>>> disabled >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged and >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged. >>>>> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from the >>>> branch >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7. >>>>> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release. >>>>> >>>>> Sai. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before >>>> cutting >>>>> the >>>>>> branch. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Nabarun Nag >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us more >>>> time >>>>> to >>>>>>> review and complete the work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anthony >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda < >>>>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing >>>> behavior >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> is not acceptable. >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default value >>>>> derived >>>>>>>> based on how user >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sai >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda < >>>>>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sai >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda < >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to >>>>> trusting >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement to >>>> add >>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> hostname >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting default >>>>> trust >>>>>>>>>> store. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on >>>> GEODE-5338 PR. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sai >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann < >>>>>>> amurm...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open >>>> PR: >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368. >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR: >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346 >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 < >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338> >>>>>> has >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right now. >>>> The >>>>> PR >>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing since. >>>> Sai >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's surprising >>>>> given >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give us >>>> a >>>>>>> update, >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos < >>>>> jra...@pivotal.io >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The new >>>>>> branch >>>>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos < >>>>>> jra...@pivotal.io >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The >>>> pull >>>>>>>>>>> request >>>>>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt < >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great! thanks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in >>>> 1.7.0, >>>>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase. Someone >>>> added >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that. We >>>> also >>>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for >>>> backward-compatibility. If >>>>>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone >>>> on the >>>>>>>>>>>> branch >>>>>>>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release >>>> process >>>>> was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we >>>> stopped >>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>> process >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the >>>> current >>>>>>>>>>>> develop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that >>>> says >>>>> its >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 = >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8, >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating >>>> against CN >>>>>>>>>>> as a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any >>>> further >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following with >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current >>>> implementation >>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>> good >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I found >>>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about and >>>> so it >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do hostname >>>>>>>>>>>> validation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on what >>>> we >>>>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander Murmann < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurm...@pivotal.io >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this >>>> discussion, >>>>>>>>>>> I see >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves for >>>> 1.7: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5601 - 🏃♀️ in progress >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5594 - 🏃♀️ waiting for PR review >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5338 - 🏃♀️ waiting for PR review >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has >>>>>>>>>>> merged >>>>>>>>>>>> PR. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to review >>>> Sai's >>>>>>>>>>> PRs. >>>>>>>>>>>> Is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe < >>>>>>>>>>>>> jde...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou < >>>>>>>>>>>>> gz...@pivotal.io >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many >>>>> historical >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with >>>> latest >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So this >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring >>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aba...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith < >>>>>>>>>>>> dsm...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615 >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to >>>> be >>>>>>>>>>> fixed >>>>>>>>>>>>> before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we don't >>>>>>>>>>> create a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic issues >>>> with >>>>>>>>>>> our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jra...@pivotal.io >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - >>>> 16:00 >>>>> GMT >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: >>>>> twitter] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: >>>> facebook] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google >>>>> plus] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> < >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_ >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jra...@pivotal.io >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00 >>>> GMT >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073 >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: >>>> twitter] >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook] >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google >>>> plus] >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] >>>>>>>>>>>> < >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_ >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
