Hello! I have fixed nightly and release builds. They should now build apache-ignite-slim. Please contact me if that does not happen.
Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 17 июн. 2020 г. в 17:00, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>: > Hello! > > I have just merged slim binary release to master. > > I will now try to tweak nightly builds TC suite to build this package > also. It may be broken for some brief period of time. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > вт, 10 мар. 2020 г. в 18:24, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>: > >> Hello! >> >> I understand that procedures are courtesy Apache Ignite, but I assume >> that you went through them and can now repeat them reproducibly. >> >> Thank you! >> -- >> Ilya Kasnacheev >> >> >> вт, 10 мар. 2020 г. в 18:12, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org>: >> >>> Ilya, >>> >>> It is not "mine" generic release procedures they are "ours" :-) >>> I've created the issue [1] based on current discussion thread. >>> >>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12765 >>> >>> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 13:31, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hello! >>> > >>> > It is currently included. >>> > >>> > Maxim, can you prepare a slim release package based on your generic >>> release >>> > procedures? We could take a look at it and then perhaps add it to >>> downloads >>> > page officially. >>> > >>> > What do you think? >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > -- >>> > Ilya Kasnacheev >>> > >>> > >>> > пт, 6 мар. 2020 г. в 20:48, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org>: >>> > >>> > > Ilya, >>> > > >>> > > `ignite-compress` is necessary for `wal page snapshot compression` >>> [1] >>> > > which in turn shows very good performance results. So, I suppose, >>> it's >>> > > better to include it to the "slim" binary. >>> > > >>> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11336 >>> > > >>> > > On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 at 13:31, Ilya Kasnacheev < >>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > Hello! >>> > > > >>> > > > I added these because they are infrastructural to Ignite, as >>> opposed to >>> > > > integrations. They are also both very slim. >>> > > > >>> > > > Regards, >>> > > > -- >>> > > > Ilya Kasnacheev >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > пт, 6 мар. 2020 г. в 13:25, Stephen Darlington < >>> > > > stephen.darling...@gridgain.com>: >>> > > > >>> > > > > Why ignite-jta and ignite-urideploy? Anecdotally at least, I >>> know very >>> > > few >>> > > > > people who use either. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > On 6 Mar 2020, at 11:09, Ilya Kasnacheev < >>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Hello! >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Re-posting from *[DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1* >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I have prepared assemblies for Apache Ignite slim packaging: >>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-slim >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > It is based on ignite-2.8 >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > You can build it with mvn initialize -Prelease,lgpl >>> > > > > -Dignite.edition=apache- >>> > > > > > ignite-slim after a normal release build. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Please consider the contents of resulting >>> > > > > > target/bin/apache-ignite-slim-2.8.0-bin.zip >>> > > > > > It will be a 65M download as opposed to main 455M >>> apache-ignite-2.8.0 >>> > > > > > distribution. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > My suggestion is that we can publish it as a post-release step >>> since >>> > > it >>> > > > > > does not affect the release in any way. If we do, we should >>> probably >>> > > > > > indicate size for every kind of artifact in our download >>> section, so >>> > > our >>> > > > > > users can choose based on that information. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The following modules are included: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > libs: >>> > > > > > core/shmem/jcache >>> > > > > > ignite-indexing >>> > > > > > ignite-spring >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > libs/optional: >>> > > > > > ignite-compress ignite-kubernetes ignite-log4j2 >>> > > ignite-rest-http >>> > > > > > ignite-spring-data_2.2 >>> > > > > > ignite-jta ignite-log4j ignite-opencensus >>> ignite-slf4j >>> > > > > > ignite-urideploy >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I have kept examples, but removed benchmarks. sqlline still >>> present, >>> > > of >>> > > > > > course. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > ignite-zookeeper has a lot of dependencies (8M) which we do not >>> > > update >>> > > > > > often enough (such as guava, curator, jackson), and which may >>> form an >>> > > > > > attack surface. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Not a pressing problem for 'integrated' ignite-zookeeper >>> users, since >>> > > > > they >>> > > > > > can re-import these dependencies with more recent versions >>> using >>> > > maven or >>> > > > > > gradle. >>> > > > > > But for our users who rely on binary package for all JARs, >>> outdated >>> > > > > > dependencies may pose a problem. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Therefore my opinion is to exclude this dependency and not put >>> our >>> > > faith >>> > > > > on >>> > > > > > zookeeper dependency version. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The same can be put for ignite-compress, and indeed, I'm not >>> sure if >>> > > we >>> > > > > > should keep it. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > We can have an ad-hoc vote here. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I would like to hear arguments for both inclusion and >>> exclusion of >>> > > > > > ignite-zookeeper and ignite-compress into slim package (in any >>> > > > > combination). >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I would also like to know if you want a formal vote on the >>> issue. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Regards, >>> > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > пн, 27 янв. 2020 г. в 21:13, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >> Alex, could you please list all the modules that will be >>> excluded? >>> > > It >>> > > > > will >>> > > > > >> help to confirm we haven't dumped anything essential. >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> - >>> > > > > >> Denis >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 12:33 AM Alexey Goncharuk < >>> > > > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> Got it, sounds good! >>> > > > > >>> Should we consider the list of modules included in the slim >>> package >>> > > > > >>> finalized? >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >>> чт, 16 янв. 2020 г. в 13:13, Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org >>> >: >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >>>> Alexey, if I understand correctly, Ilya does not suggest to >>> > > pre-built >>> > > > > >>>> binaries, just to ship it with configure script >>> pre-generated, >>> > > which >>> > > > > >>>> is a common practice for autotools packages. Building will >>> be >>> > > still >>> > > > > >>>> required for the user, but there will be less requirements >>> and >>> > > > > >>>> possible errors during build. >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>>> I like the idea. Let's do this. >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>>> Best Regards, >>> > > > > >>>> Igor >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 11:57 AM Alexey Goncharuk < >>> > > > > >>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> To me it doesn't really matter if it will be 'slim' or >>> 'lite' :) >>> > > I >>> > > > > >>> would >>> > > > > >>>>> not name it 'core' because indeed it would be confusing >>> with the >>> > > core >>> > > > > >>>>> module name. >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> Agree that platforms support is useful, so I would keep >>> them as >>> > > Ilya >>> > > > > >>>>> suggested. As for the C++ packages pre-build - let's hear >>> out >>> > > Igor's >>> > > > > >>>>> opinion on this. Pre-built binaries certainly add >>> usability, but >>> > > I am >>> > > > > >>> not >>> > > > > >>>>> sure how those binaries should be tested afterwards. >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 18:33, Alexey Kuznetsov < >>> > > akuznet...@apache.org >>> > > > > >>> : >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> I'm +1 for "SLIM" it is a common name in Docker world. >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 9:48 PM Petr Ivanov < >>> > > mr.wei...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > >>>> wrote: >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> +1 for slim binary >>> > > > > >>>>>>> Plus docker-slim >>> > > > > >>>>>>> Plus RPM / DEB packages modularisation like PHP >>> distribution — >>> > > > > >> with >>> > > > > >>>>> core >>> > > > > >>>>>>> and lots of integrations / modules. >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> On 15 Jan 2020, at 17:40, Ilya Kasnacheev < >>> > > > > >>>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> wrote: >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Hello! >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> I think we should name it "core" since we already have >>> > > > > >>> ignite-core >>> > > > > >>>>> and >>> > > > > >>>>>> it >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> will be confusing. Maybe we should go full 00s and call >>> it >>> > > > > >>> "lite"? >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> I also think we should keep both .Net and C++. .Net is >>> > > runnable >>> > > > > >>> out >>> > > > > >>>>> of >>> > > > > >>>>>>> box >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> which is awesome, and C++ needs building but it is >>> rather >>> > > small >>> > > > > >>> in >>> > > > > >>>>>> source >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> form. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> I also suggest a different change to build process. >>> Let's ship >>> > > > > >>> C++ >>> > > > > >>>>> with >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> automake, etc, already run, for all binary packaging >>> options? >>> > > > > >>>> WDYT? I >>> > > > > >>>>>> can >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> assist in build process tuning. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Regards, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> -- >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 17:18, Denis Magda < >>> dma...@apache.org>: >>> > > > > >>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Alex, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> I'm on your end and support the proposal. Could you >>> also >>> > > > > >> clarify >>> > > > > >>>> if >>> > > > > >>>>>> you >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> suggest we keeping or removing C++ and .NET thick >>> clients? >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Speaking of the naming, how about titling such >>> packages as >>> > > > > >>> 'core' >>> > > > > >>>>>>> instead >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> of 'slim', i.e., 'apache-ignite-core-{version}'? >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> - >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Denis >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 5:17 AM Ilya Kasnacheev < >>> > > > > >>>>>>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Hello! >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Pavel, I believe these JARs are fully covered by the >>> list of >>> > > > > >>>>> modules >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> specified above. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> -- >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 14:50, Pavel Tupitsyn < >>> > > > > >>>> ptupit...@apache.org >>> > > > > >>>>>> : >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I like the idea, current distribution is certainly >>> too big. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Here is a list of jar files we include in NuGet >>> package: >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> cache-api-1.0.0.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> commons-codec-1.11.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> commons-logging-1.1.1.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> h2-1.4.197.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ignite-core-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ignite-indexing-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ignite-shmem-1.0.0.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ignite-spring-2.9.0-SNAPSHOT.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> lucene-analyzers-common-7.4.0.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> lucene-core-7.4.0.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> lucene-queryparser-7.4.0.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-aop-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-beans-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-context-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-core-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-expression-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-jdbc-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> spring-tx-4.3.18.RELEASE.jar >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Those are required for SQL and Spring configs to work >>> > > > > >>> properly, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> maybe we want to include them into the slim distro >>> as well. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 2:25 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hello! >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> This is a reasonable idea. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should also drop benchmarks/ directory >>> from >>> > > that >>> > > > > >>>>> build, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> it's >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 60M >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> of (potentially vulnerable) JARs that are not >>> needed by an >>> > > > > >>>>> average >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> developer's use cases. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 13:10, Alexey Goncharuk < >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to discuss with the community a >>> possibility >>> > > > > >> to >>> > > > > >>>>> create >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> additional 'slim' binary releases and docker >>> images for >>> > > > > >>> Apache >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Ignite. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> The >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> reason is two-fold: >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * The full set of 3rd party libraries distributed >>> with >>> > > > > >>> Apache >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Ignite >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> looks >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> too large for me. I know there is an ongoing >>> activity >>> > > > > >>> towards >>> > > > > >>>>> more >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> clear >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignite modularization [1][2][3], but this seems to >>> be >>> > > > > >> quite >>> > > > > >>> a >>> > > > > >>>>> long >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> process. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, creating a slim release may >>> give an >>> > > > > >>>> immediate >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> benefit >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the users who are interested in a smaller image. >>> For >>> > > > > >>> example, >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> removing >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> benchmarks alone from the binary release saves 80M. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * As Ilya Kasnacheev demonstrated [4], the more >>> 3rd party >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> libraries >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> we >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> have, the more potential vulnerabilities will show >>> up in >>> > > > > >>> audit >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> tools. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> This >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> may be a formal barrier for Apache Ignite adoption >>> and >>> > > > > >>> moving >>> > > > > >>>> to >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> production >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for many users. Having a slim image with the >>> minimum >>> > > > > >> number >>> > > > > >>> of >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (yet complete enough to fit the majority of >>> use-cases) >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> significantly >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> reduces this risk. >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder what community thinks regarding this >>> idea? Given >>> > > > > >>> the >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> recent >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> study >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of Apache Ignite use-cases, I suggest the >>> following list >>> > > > > >> of >>> > > > > >>>>>> modules >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> to >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> be >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> included to the slim release/image (a subject to >>> discuss, >>> > > > > >> of >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> course): >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-core >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-indexing >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-rest-http >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-spring >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-log4j >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-log4j2 >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-slf4j >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-urideploy >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-kubernetes >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * ignite-opencensus >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Ignite-3-0-and-to-be-removed-list-td42330.html >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/IGNITE-12358-Migrate-ZeroMQ-module-to-ignite-extensions-td45067.html >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/IGNITE-12361-Migrate-Flume-module-to-ignite-extensions-td45010.html >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [4] >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Ignite-2-8-RELEASE-Time-Scope-Manager-td43616i100.html#a44994 >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>>> -- >>> > > > > >>>>>> Alexey Kuznetsov >>> > > > > >>>>>> >>> > > > > >>>>> >>> > > > > >>>> >>> > > > > >>> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> >>
