Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
Noel J. Bergman wrote: David Crossley wrote: I suggest that we go further and make it a requirement of graduation from the Incubator that the project already has some people helping at infra@ That can only apply if there are ASF Members willing to do it, because we don't give apmail or root access to non-Members. And not everyone wants or feels competent to manage the tasks. What tasks did you have in mind? Anything. Even just answering other users queries. That will relieve the other infra people to attend to the new project's core needs. I want to instill at the beginning that we all need to look after our own ASF - love your Infra. If you want to participate in a project, then be prepared to assist with the general infrastructure. Leave the rest of this account creation type stuff to the main infra people ... -David Seems to me that account creation is primary, followed by mailing lists. Otherwise, people can contribute documentation and automation tools. We have a new proposal that we should take a good long look at regarding automation. We could give more people karma to write the account request file, so that the roots need only to run the script to effect the changes. We still don't have workflow in place to enforce it, but what if we had the script check the CLA records and emit only those for which the e-mail addresses match? --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: The Incubator and Infrastructure
David Crossley wrote: I suggest that we go further and make it a requirement of graduation from the Incubator that the project already has some people helping at infra@ That can only apply if there are ASF Members willing to do it, because we don't give apmail or root access to non-Members. And not everyone wants or feels competent to manage the tasks. What tasks did you have in mind? Seems to me that account creation is primary, followed by mailing lists. Otherwise, people can contribute documentation and automation tools. We have a new proposal that we should take a good long look at regarding automation. We could give more people karma to write the account request file, so that the roots need only to run the script to effect the changes. We still don't have workflow in place to enforce it, but what if we had the script check the CLA records and emit only those for which the e-mail addresses match? --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On 9/2/05, Niclas Hedhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 02 September 2005 10:28, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. This has been my impression as well. infra@ is begging for help, but seems to have problem with; a. only members allowed in for the stuff that each projects PMC Chair can't do already. b. requesting people without access to help out on answering questions, which more often than not, requires peeks into files that such volunteer doesn't have access to, or to places that may or may not be documented. As someone currently sinking into the mire of infra having just become a member, I have to agree; the work available for the average committer isn't very clearly identified. This has improved, Bugzilla-Jira migrations are now in danger of happening and although Henning is a member, Tim isn't and I don't think Henning's member-ness is relevant to the work. Answering user questions on the infra@ mailing list is always useful, especially given the infra-private@ bit below. Leo, There are three ways to ease the burden on infra team, and I think all are wanted; 1. reduction of requests coming into infra@ (this thread covers that), Also partly solved in a different way. infra-private was created for dealing with the emergencies/big-bad-things (hard-drive blown up, minotaur fscks, giving access to volunteer ). The infra@ mailing list has moved more towards user requests and some of the core people have the chance to opt out of this list now. 2. more hands to help out, Thus the volunteer requests. 3. more tools to automate. Leo's been behind a lot of design plans for that, and there's a CA tool looming on the horizon. An improvement here would be for someone (Leo?) to give us a better overall plan of what's requested and where it fits. One of the problems with this is that you still need a certain access to handle some of them, or at least a certain amount of knowledge of how the system works. I think there may be an infra-tools@ list that I didn't join to discuss these. Can't remember if that happened or not. There's another one too. Get involved with the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list (I think that's the correct one?); discussing ways to provide a site building zone and how to handle that kind of stuff. I am specially curious of what can be done about 3. ASF consists of (allegedly) more than a 1000 committers. How hard could it be to find a couple that are capable of putting this in place? Very. Since only members are allowed in, they are busy elsewhere and infra team has no time to extract all the details for someone to implement these independently, or so it seems. We're all here to scratch our itches, writing code for Infra doesn't scratch the itch unless you've been sucked into Infra. But you're right, cornering Leo into drawing a picture of Infra, what bits are where and what bits can be automated would be useful. Leo, will you be at ApacheCon? :) As for more hands, I think the infrastructure team needs to compile a list of what committers, members and root must do. Once you have identified work that committers can do, members should volunteer higher up the ladder, and likewise for roots. Yup. My first worry was on what the existing people were doing and where we were lacking backup, so I've a very rudimentary form of this with people's actual names attached. I'll work to genericize this and try to put in more tasks, and hopefully find out where there are actual problems. SVN migrations are ticking along quite nicely for example, so no great need to throw more resource at it (unless it's people telling us that they're ready to migrate, hint hint). Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
Henri Yandell wrote: Niclas Hedhman wrote: Davanum Srinivas wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. This has been my impression as well. infra@ is begging for help, but seems to have problem with; a. only members allowed in for the stuff that each projects PMC Chair can't do already. b. requesting people without access to help out on answering questions, which more often than not, requires peeks into files that such volunteer doesn't have access to, or to places that may or may not be documented. As someone currently sinking into the mire of infra having just become a member, I have to agree; the work available for the average committer isn't very clearly identified. We have eased that problem a bit lately. If committers show interest, then we will grab them and add them to an infrastructure-interest group which has access to certain areas of infra SVN. This happens on a case-by-case basis. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On 02-09-2005 04:28, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. NACK. There are lots of ways to help. I remember writing several e-mails detailing how. There are several non-members actively helping out with useful stuff. Heck, there's a non-committer or two doing the same. But no, infra@ is not going to give out root access to people pretty much unknown to the team. - LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On 02-09-2005 08:27, Sanjiva Weerawarana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 14:19 +0800, Niclas Hedhman wrote: Now, I have suggested before, and still do, that infra starts/becomes a standard ASF project, source code, site, jira, wiki, dev mailing list and all the normal setup, including ordinary committers and contributors. Indeed. Many people have. We discussed this stuff a lot during AC EU. The existing infra team doesn't feel like rash changes (which is a Smart Stance To Take and deserves Community Support) so we're taking baby steps along a similar path. You can help us take those steps. Infra places the requests of tools to be made into the Jira there and let evolution take over. I also suggested this a while back but was given the brush off :(. Hrmpf. There's actually a few concrete requests in jira for help. There's been one for years (with detailed specs and all) regarding CLA/user account handling automation, which was even sent to committers@ at some point (yielding a total of 0 volunteers at that time). Everyone is welcome to submit patches to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/apworkflow/ (really cool stuff! Python+subversion based web application with wiki-like functionality! Several page todo list! Everyone come out and play!) And you're likely to get write karma at the first sign of a second useful patch. I hope it'll get traction this time around - IMO its the only way to solve the infra issue (short of outsourcing infra to SourceForge ;-)). Its *part* of the solution :-) In any case, this ain't the mailing list for these discussions! Cheers, Leo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On Friday 02 September 2005 17:42, Leo Simons wrote: By all means, please help make it happen! Step 1 is subscribing to infrastructure _at_ apache _dot_ org, if you haven't already. After almost 2 years of trying to find angles of helping out, I finally gave up and unsubscribed a few weeks back. Outsiders receives little insight how everything is done, the infrastructure repository is closed (although the realm says ASF Committers it is probably set to members) and the bits and pieces that are open, must be dug up elsewhere. Sorry to say, I think infra@ overload is self-inflicted, being disorganized, non-transparent and put out fire by hand instead of preventive measures, automated procedures and product development attitude towards the tools. Well Good luck with your baby steps. Niclas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
Leo, Specifically 2 people asked read persmissions on the files. they were told that's not possible. Am NOT talking about root privs. -- dims On 9/2/05, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 02-09-2005 04:28, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. NACK. There are lots of ways to help. I remember writing several e-mails detailing how. There are several non-members actively helping out with useful stuff. Heck, there's a non-committer or two doing the same. But no, infra@ is not going to give out root access to people pretty much unknown to the team. - LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On 02.09.2005, at 14:07, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Leo, Specifically 2 people asked read persmissions on the files. they were told that's not possible. Am NOT talking about root privs. Which files? Why? Who? Cheers, Erik -- dims On 9/2/05, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 02-09-2005 04:28, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. NACK. There are lots of ways to help. I remember writing several e- mails detailing how. There are several non-members actively helping out with useful stuff. Heck, there's a non-committer or two doing the same. But no, infra@ is not going to give out root access to people pretty much unknown to the team. - LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
Sal and Ian from HP expressed interest on [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=webservices-generalm=111901932102075w=2 I gave them the pointers: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=webservices-generalm=111901966108282w=2 They started a thread in infra@ mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See the end of the thread, they asked for read-only access to infra stuff to read the FAQ and README's: Then they attempted to ask on #asfinfra for the same permissions to read material and get to know stuff. That's where they were given the brush off. Sigh! the SVN module http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/ should be at least viewable by committers if you want/expect them to help. thanks, dims On 9/2/05, Erik Abele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 02.09.2005, at 14:07, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Leo, Specifically 2 people asked read persmissions on the files. they were told that's not possible. Am NOT talking about root privs. Which files? Why? Who? Cheers, Erik -- dims On 9/2/05, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 02-09-2005 04:28, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. NACK. There are lots of ways to help. I remember writing several e- mails detailing how. There are several non-members actively helping out with useful stuff. Heck, there's a non-committer or two doing the same. But no, infra@ is not going to give out root access to people pretty much unknown to the team. - LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service Platform - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On 02.09.2005, at 14:45, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Sal and Ian from HP expressed interest on [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=webservices- generalm=111901932102075w=2 Quoting: What are the steps for me to get set up w/ admin rights for SVN? Once I get set up, I'll read up on how to do basic SVN admin tasks, and then try to knock out some of the easier issues in JIRA. I gave them the pointers: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=webservices- generalm=111901966108282w=2 Quoting: ...There are various readme's in infrastructure SVN. ... In your intro email, specifically mention that you are on the WS-PMC, want to help with mailing lists and SVN and that you can start with the pending tasks of migrating stuff off of incubator. Dims, come on - this is not the way the ASF works. What would you do if someone came to one of the WS dev-lists and asked: Okay, I'm willing to help, give me committership and I'll see where I can help out with some commits... - huh? Isn't it rather in the line of: Hey, I've found a problem and worked out a solution, here it is (e.g. a patch), can we integrate that? - same with infra: hey, i found some SVN issues in Jira. I've set up a test repo in my homedir and imported their CVS module, looks good so far. Can we integrate that with the live repo and shut down the CVS module after the developers confirmed that everything is fine? That's the difference, you know ;-) They started a thread in infra@ mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See the end of the thread, they asked for read-only access to infra stuff to read the FAQ and README's: Then they attempted to ask on #asfinfra for the same permissions to read material and get to know stuff. That's where they were given the brush off. There is no real documentation in the infra repo regarding this. It's all public: http://apache.org/dev/cvs2svn.html - what do they need to resolve these JIRA issues? Can they look at them, think about them and then come up with specific requests? For example: Someone is asking for karma for XXX in JIRA; from reading the list and the website, I guess he will have to be added to the file minotaur:/x1/svn/asf-authorization but I don't have karma to do this by myself so here is a patch... - do that and I promise you'll be in in the near future :) Sigh! the SVN module http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/ should be at least viewable by committers if you want/expect them to help. Sigh! I don't understand why this repository is so important before opening up a terminal, ssh'ing to minotaur.apache.org, sitting down and looking around?!? That's a mystery to me but so be it and afaiac I'd be fine with opening it up since we scrubbed every bit of sensitive information in there some time ago... Cheers, Erik smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On Friday 02 September 2005 20:23, Erik Abele wrote: I honestly don't feel like fueling this thread, so please don't hesitate to say I am outright stupid and don't know what I am talking about, and I'll shut up as a good citizen... My intention is not to whine. Why isn't that working for others? Yes. Why? My take is that only one in 300 committers have what it takes to get thru. I was not one of them... Can that ratio be improved? If it takes 10 people to keep the ship afloat, (as a manager) I would plan for at least one person leaving every quarter, and that would then set the minimum recruitment pace. The infra repo isn't the almighty tool everyone needs. Most material in there (if not all by now) isn't instantly useful if you are not on top of the different setups. Ok. So I don't need to bother about the docs, since they may confuse me even more? Good start. Furthermore you can find nearly everything on the machines itself, mostly world-readable; I noticed a pluralis of machines. AFAIK, only minotaur is world accessible. a) overload is self-inflicted Uh oh, just consider the following example: account requests. How long can it possibly take? Let me make a guess ~1 minute, perhaps 2. Let's say I spend half an hour a day, that makes it 15 a day, and several thousand per year. Apparently, this can't be a bottle neck. - pmc votes in new committer, - makes him sent in a CLA; - the PMC chair watches for the receipt of the CLA and if it gets recorded, he sends a single email to root@ (cc'ing the PMC) in a pre-defined format and waits till the account is created. Great. So it is not a problem, anymore? b) being disorganized Maybe, but keep in mind that we are all volunteers and that not only the ASF is growing tremendously, our hardware/infrastructure needs are doind so too. Old systems and services have to be kept running for projects who want to still use it, new systems and services have to be put in place (and administered) because projects are begging for it. The complexity is growing daily. I recognize that. And I happen to be of the opinion that it is self-inflicted. Leo wrote a humorous mail about it two months ago Why we say no.. And just like projects don't have a choice of CVS, such policy could be introduced for Jira/Bugzilla/Scarab (any other?) as well, if it is seen as a taking up precious time. Ask Leo and Upayavira how easy it is to set up a wiki (which btw, is running excellently for some committer's company: 'our 22 developers cannot live w/o it, why the heck isn't this available at the ASF?') for billions of clicks per day? I agree, and again refer to the Why we say no and self-inflicted... c) non-transparent Hmm, IMO infra is *not* non-transparent; it's just that the bar is pretty high (knowledge-wise and confidence-wise (in the sense of trust)). Please give me an example of what is so non-transparent; I'm willing to help you here. Example 1. You said it yourself - docs are shaky, but I could live with that. The problem is everyone knows they are not good and it has been hinted that a lot of material is outright wrong. That makes it even worse. Example 2. Most requests comes in as either a mail or a Jira issue. Some time later, someone like yourself, mark it as done. If I was overworked, and that I wanted others to get involved, I would spend more time explaining what I did to make it done than I did to do it. *In detail*. Over my time, that rarely happened, and I took it as they don't want help with that. Example 3. I think that most resources are turned off by default, and only after long considerations, made accessible (read and/or write) to a wider audience. That is natural security awareness kicking in, but little discussion is going on, about how to make more info available. Can other people watch this configuration? I have always been of the opinion that ASF is more secretive than the situation calls for. The fact that many services live on machines that are not accessible, makes it difficult to peek around to get an idea of how things are setup, without bothering the peeps who do the work, since it is likely I won't be able to help in that particular area right now. d) put out fire by hand Well, that's the occasional hdd failure or worm attack or svn wedge or ... . It's pretty hard to come up with automated solutions to every problem so administering a system always means to baby-sit it in some way. If it would be solvable by a click on a fancy button, the managers could do it and we wouldn't need any sysadmins anymore :) I get the impression by your response that there are no problems, or overload at the infra@ team. Catastrophic events can't be automated, but they happen rarely. All the 'bulk' is already streamlined, and shouldn't take much time. So what is it? Full time staff is needed, so there must be something. Thanks, I'm nearly outta here too - it's far more easy to
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
On 02.09.2005, at 17:25, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Friday 02 September 2005 20:23, Erik Abele wrote: I honestly don't feel like fueling this thread, so please don't hesitate to say I am outright stupid and don't know what I am talking about, and I'll shut up as a good citizen... My intention is not to whine. Your last msg was quite fueling, no? ;-) Why isn't that working for others? Yes. Why? My take is that only one in 300 committers have what it takes to get thru. I was not one of them... Can that ratio be improved? If it takes 10 people to keep the ship afloat, (as a manager) I would plan for at least one person leaving every quarter, and that would then set the minimum recruitment pace. Uhm, 'recruitement' (in the managerial sense) doesn't really work in a volunteer-driven organization with collaborative and meritocratic development processes... you can of course encourage people but it seems that that unfortunately doesn't really work with the unsexy jobs of [EMAIL PROTECTED] The infra repo isn't the almighty tool everyone needs. Most material in there (if not all by now) isn't instantly useful if you are not on top of the different setups. Ok. So I don't need to bother about the docs, since they may confuse me even more? Good start. I didn't say that; all I said is that the infra repo is not our primary documentation place for beginners. It's just the place where we keep configuration files like crontabs, dns zonefiles, the httpd config and so on. There is also a limited set of documentation but I wonder why a infra newcomer has to know things like how to access the terminal server or how the network in the colo is set up. Furthermore you can find nearly everything on the machines itself, mostly world-readable; I noticed a pluralis of machines. AFAIK, only minotaur is world accessible. Yep and that should be enough to show that you know what you are doing and that what you are doing is goodness... a) overload is self-inflicted Uh oh, just consider the following example: account requests. How long can it possibly take? Let me make a guess ~1 minute, perhaps 2. Let's say I spend half an hour a day, that makes it 15 a day, and several thousand per year. Apparently, this can't be a bottle neck. You snipped the most important failures so trust me that it isn't done within a 1 minute. But that just shows the ignorance (not necessarily willful) we are facing, see below. - pmc votes in new committer, - makes him sent in a CLA; - the PMC chair watches for the receipt of the CLA and if it gets recorded, he sends a single email to root@ (cc'ing the PMC) in a pre-defined format and waits till the account is created. Great. So it is not a problem, anymore? If everybody would follow this scheme it would be nice but as I said, nobody is doing so. Well, to be correct and fair, nobody *was* doing so, it is really better now with respect to account requests - but that was just one of a bunch of examples to make my point clear: even if we have a process and documentation in place, we are still facing a lot of people not following the process, ignoring the documentation and whining and pestering to get their work done :( b) being disorganized Maybe, but keep in mind that we are all volunteers and that not only the ASF is growing tremendously, our hardware/infrastructure needs are doind so too. Old systems and services have to be kept running for projects who want to still use it, new systems and services have to be put in place (and administered) because projects are begging for it. The complexity is growing daily. I recognize that. And I happen to be of the opinion that it is self- inflicted. Leo wrote a humorous mail about it two months ago Why we say no.. And just like projects don't have a choice of CVS, such policy could be introduced for Jira/Bugzilla/Scarab (any other?) as well, if it is seen as a taking up precious time. Yes, infra could say 'no' more often or could simply shut down the services they don't want to administer. To be honest, I'd be fine with this (and its consequences (people/projects leaving, flamewars, what-have-you)) but since I don't want to discuss this in hundreds of emails, I'll simply leave and let others take over. No harm done. c) non-transparent Hmm, IMO infra is *not* non-transparent; it's just that the bar is pretty high (knowledge-wise and confidence-wise (in the sense of trust)). Please give me an example of what is so non-transparent; I'm willing to help you here. Example 1. You said it yourself - docs are shaky, but I could live with that. The problem is everyone knows they are not good and it has been hinted that a lot of material is outright wrong. That makes it even worse. Okay, but that is not 'non-transparent' - the bar is just higher. I agree that it'd be nice to have more docs but OTOH the people have to also read them, see my
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
--On September 2, 2005 7:24:54 PM +0200 Erik Abele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, infra could say 'no' more often or could simply shut down the services they don't want to administer. To be honest, I'd be fine with this (and its consequences (people/projects leaving, flamewars, what-have-you)) but since I don't want to discuss this in hundreds of emails, I'll simply leave and let others take over. No harm done. In addition to agreeing with everything Erik said, I'll add the following: Publicity and legal issues can't be neglected or dropped the same way that the infrastructure stuff could be (or is by necessity, due to overload). The effect of letting bad stories fester in the media or ignoring a lawsuit is a far greater risk to the foundation than not creating an account the second someone submits an account request. -- justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
Niclas, On 02-09-2005 17:25, Niclas Hedhman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I honestly don't feel like fueling this thread, so please don't hesitate to say I am outright stupid and don't know what I am talking about, and I'll shut up as a good citizen... My intention is not to whine. In that case you're not coming across too well you know. What *is* your intention? Are you helping us out here? How? - LSD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Incubator and Infrastructure
Davanum Srinivas wrote: Several people on WS-PMC offered to help infra. They were turned down as they are not members. I find that surprising. We are actively encouraging *committers* to be involved. http://www.apache.org/dev/infra-volunteer.html There is plenty that they can do. I am not talking about satisfying their own project needs, but about general help. That will free up the other people to concentrate on stuff that needs tighter permissions. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
