Anything executed is implied. The difference is that the plugins
section can actually cause a plugin to be executed, but the equivalent
management section will not.

Cheers,
Brett

On 5/5/05, J. Matthew Pryor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK so my (hopefully) last question then is "How do I tell what the canonical
> list of 'Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin' is"?
> 
> Thanks for the clarification (of the clarification ;-)
> 
> Matthew
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 3:01 AM
> > To: Maven Users List
> > Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Alright, this is the part where I print a complete retraction
> > of everything I just emailed to the list... :)
> >
> > Next time, I promise, I'll actually re-read the code and/or
> > do some Right-Click -> References -> Project in Eclipse for a
> > given piece of code before I shoot my mouth off. In reality,
> > Brett is 100% correct (he should be, he's looking at the code
> > right now :). Implied plugins like maven-compiler-plugin will
> > also trigger the configurations in <pluginManagement/> on a
> > plugin-by-plugin basis. So, in reality, both of the examples
> > that I gave below will work to configure the compiler plugin.
> >
> > Sorry for the confusion, and I'll try not to yell my comments
> > in from the other room next time. :)
> >
> > john
> >
> > John Casey wrote:
> > > I have a refinement or two to this...
> > >
> > > Brett Porter wrote:
> > >
> > >>>John has just made a final fix. So, to summarise the
> > behaviour here:
> > >>>
> > >>>- <pluginManagement /> is inherited
> > >>>- <configuration/> elements are merged together during inheritence
> > >>>- <plugins/> is NOT inherited
> > >>>- the final plugin management values are merged into the
> > <plugins/>
> > >>>element of the POM being built.
> > >
> > >
> > > This is critical: the <pluginManagement/> configurations are ONLY
> > > activated if you declare a corresponding <plugin/> entry in
> > the build
> > > section's <plugins/> stanza. pluginManagement is an opt-in
> > system; it
> > > will only affect your build if you specifically invite it in. Also,
> > > you cannot opt-in for all of the managed configuration at one go.
> > >
> > > To be clear: The only way to use the configuration declared within
> > > <pluginManagement/> section is to declare a corresponding <plugin/>
> > > entry within <build><plugins/></build>. The minimal information
> > > necessary to link a build's actual plugin to the
> > corresponding managed
> > > plugin information is <groupId/> and <artifactId/>.
> > >
> > > This WILL NOT configure the source/target properties of the
> > > maven-compiler-plugin:
> > >
> > > <project>
> > > ...
> > >   <build>
> > >     <pluginManagement>
> > >       <plugins>
> > >         <plugin>
> > >           <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >           <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >           <version>1.0-alpha-1</version>
> > >           <configuration>
> > >             <source>1.5</source>
> > >             <target>1.5</target>
> > >           </configuration>
> > >         </plugin>
> > >       </plugins>
> > >     </pluginManagement>
> > >   </build>
> > > </project>
> > >
> > > The managed information will ONLY be used when you opt-in for that
> > > configuration by declaring the plugin for use in the build
> > section, like so:
> > >
> > > <project>
> > > ...
> > >   <build>
> > >     <pluginManagement>
> > >       <plugins>
> > >         <plugin>
> > >           <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >           <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >           <version>1.0-alpha-1</version>
> > >           <configuration>
> > >             <source>1.5</source>
> > >             <target>1.5</target>
> > >           </configuration>
> > >         </plugin>
> > >       </plugins>
> > >     </pluginManagement>
> > >
> > > <!-- THIS IS REQUIRED TO "OPT IN" TO THE MANAGED CONFIGURATION. -->
> > >     <plugins>
> > >       <plugin>
> > >         <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >         <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >       </plugin>
> > >     </plugins>
> > >   </build>
> > > </project>
> > >
> > > Looking at this, I'm not 100% convinced that the implicit
> > > configuration of maven-compiler-plugin is not
> > appropriate...the only
> > > question in that case is how to undo this configuration,
> > which has the
> > > same answer as undoing any configuration element: don't put
> > it in the
> > > shared configuration in the first place. All I'm attempting
> > to do here
> > > is describe the way the current process functions...this
> > may change in
> > > the future.
> > >
> > >
> > >>>The downside here is that there is no way to exclude
> > something that
> > >>>has already been declared in a parent. This is intended -
> > if you come
> > >>>across the situation you can redefine it with a different
> > value, or
> > >>>you should not inherit the value.
> > >>>
> > >>>Why was this chosen, given the downside?
> > >>>
> > >>>The downside of going the other direction (where
> > configuration would
> > >>>completely replace anything given by the inherited
> > version) was much
> > >>>more confusing: options set for inheritence would have disappeared
> > >>>from children.
> > >>>
> > >>>If anyone has any questions, please say so. J. Matthew Pryor has
> > >>>volunteered to help document this, so it should be
> > available on the
> > >>>web site in time.
> > >>>
> > >>>Cheers,
> > >>>Brett
> > >>>
> > >>>On 4/28/05, Peter van de Hoef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Hi John,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I've been away for a while and see that a lot of activity
> > has been going on in the meantime!
> > >>>>Since I am just an m2 newbee, I cannot oversee if the
> > issues arround
> > >>>><plugins> and <pluginManagement> sections have been
> > resolved now. So
> > >>>>I filed the <pluginManagement> issue anyway
> > (http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-362). Please ignore it
> > if it has already been fixed now.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I will try to build the latest from SVN and perform some
> > tests with my own projects.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Thanks for all the good work.
> > >>>>Peter van de Hoef
> > >>>>
> > >>>>John Casey wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>I'm looking at:
> > >>>
> > >>>-
> > >>>org.apache.maven.project.inheritance.DefaultModelInheritanc
> > eAssembler
> > >>>- org.apache.maven.project.injection.DefaultModelDefaultsInjector
> > >>>
> > >>>and here's what I see:
> > >>>
> > >>>- Combination of inherited <pluginManagement/> sections
> > (both parent
> > >>>and child have <pluginManagement/> stuff defined):
> > >>>-----------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >>>-
> > >>>
> > >>>Everything is merged, with locally specified elements overriding
> > >>>ancestor-specified elements in the event of a tie.
> > >>>
> > >>>NOTE: There was a problem with the <configuration/> of a
> > plugin not
> > >>>being merged. I'm fixing this as we speak, although it's
> > not going to
> > >>>be in alpha-1 obviously... :)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>- Combination of local POM's <plugins/> with [inherited]
> > >>><pluginManagement/> section:
> > >>>-----------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >>>-
> > >>>
> > >>>HOW IT WORKS: <configuration/> elements (both on <goal/> and on
> > >>><plugin/>) are combined, with ties going to the local
> > configuration
> > >>>(if the elements collide, the local specification wins).
> > The list of
> > >>>goals is accumulated, with the previous note applying to
> > collisions of goals.
> > >>>That is, if the <pluginManagement/> section specifies some
> > goals and
> > >>>their configuration for a given plugin, and the <plugin/> section
> > >>>specifies some goals, the goal definitions from the
> > >>><pluginManagement/> section are merged into the one from
> > the plugin specification itself.
> > >>>
> > >>>NOTE-TO-SELF: Now that I look at this, it might not be a
> > Good Thing(tm).
> > >>>For instance, how would I suppress a goal that was declared in
> > >>><pluginManagement/> but allow other goals from that plugin to run?
> > >>>How would I suppress plugin configuration declared similarly?
> > >>>
> > >>>HOW I'M FIXING IT TO WORK: Any <configuration/> or
> > <goals/> element
> > >>>specified within a plugin in a local POM will negate the
> > usage of the
> > >>>corresponding element in the <pluginManagement/> section for that
> > >>>plugin. This allows users to specify local overrides
> > without having
> > >>>to deal with the accumulation of common settings which are
> > wrong for
> > >>>the local case but which are not overridden in the local
> > POM. It also
> > >>>makes the override mechanism more consistent with
> > <dependencyManagement/>.
> > >>>
> > >>>These changes will not be available to -alpha-1, obviously, but
> > >>>should work on the svn-trunk in a few minutes.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Hope this clears things up somewhat. :)
> > >>>
> > >>>Cheers,
> > >>>
> > >>>-john
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>J. Matthew Pryor wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>From the docs here
> > >>>>http://maven.apache.org/maven2/project-descriptor.html#Bui
> > ld about
> > >>>>the <pluginManagement/> element
> > >>>
> > >>>>Any local configuration for a given plugin will override the
> > >>>>plugin's entire definition here.
> > >>>
> > >>>>So what constitutes 'local configuration'. If I am to
> > reference the
> > >>>>plugin, enough to invoke the configuration supplied in a parent
> > >>>><pluginManagement/>, how do I do that without overriding
> > the plugin's entire definition?
> > >>>
> > >>>>Also am I understanding correctly that <build><plugins/>
> > setting are
> > >>>>never inherited?
> > >>>
> > >>>>BTW I am making good progress writing all this up for the
> > user docs.
> > >>>>Definitely need this clarification
> > >>>
> > >>>>jmp
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>-----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>From: Peter van de Hoef [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>>>>Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:32 PM
> > >>>>>To: Maven Users List
> > >>>>>Subject: Re: [m2] POM inheritance
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Hi John,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Thanks for your help. So <pluginManagement> is used for
> > specifying
> > >>>>>plugin versions and configuration parameters, whether
> > they are used
> > >>>>>or not. This will be inherited by child projects. The <plugins>
> > >>>>>section is just a list of plugins that will actually be
> > used. This
> > >>>>>list has to be repeated in a child project though, whenever a
> > >>>>>setting of build-section has to be changed.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Now, I have specified a <pluginManagement> section in the parent
> > >>>>>POM, in the hope that it gets inherited by derived
> > projects, but it
> > >>>>>does not; in the child project, the java compiler starts
> > >>>>>complaining about assertions again.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>The only way to solve this is to repeat myself by
> > inserting a copy
> > >>>>>of the <pluginManagement> section of the parent into the child.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>If I look at 'DefaultModelInheritanceAssembler.java' it appears
> > >>>>>that the assemblePluginManagementInheritance()
> > >>>>>function correctly takes care of <pluginManagement>
> > sections of the
> > >>>>>parent.
> > >>>>>What is going wrong here? Did I miss something in the
> > project defs?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>The parent POM looks like:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><project>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <name>Parent POM</name>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <groupId>_test</groupId>
> > >>>>>   <artifactId>parent</artifactId>
> > >>>>>   <version>1.0</version>
> > >>>>>   <packaging>pom</packaging>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <modules>
> > >>>>>           <module>child</module>
> > >>>>>   </modules>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <build>
> > >>>>>           <sourceDirectory>src</sourceDirectory>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>           <pluginManagement>
> > >>>>>                   <plugins>
> > >>>>>                           <plugin>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><version>1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > >>>>>                                   <configuration>
> > >>>>>                                           <source>1.5</source>
> > >>>>>                                           <target>1.5</target>
> > >>>>>                                   </configuration>
> > >>>>>                           </plugin>
> > >>>>>                   </plugins>
> > >>>>>           </pluginManagement>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>           <plugins>
> > >>>>>                   <plugin>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >>>>>                   </plugin>
> > >>>>>           </plugins>
> > >>>>>   </build>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>></project>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>And the child, which inherits from the parent:
> > >>>>>The <build> section is overridden with a different
> > >>>>><sourceDirectory> and, since the <plugins> of the parent
> > gets lost,
> > >>>>>it is repeated.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><project>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <name>Child POM</name>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <groupId>_test</groupId>
> > >>>>>   <artifactId>child</artifactId>
> > >>>>>   <version>1.0</version>
> > >>>>>   <packaging>pom</packaging>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <parent>
> > >>>>>           <groupId>_test</groupId>
> > >>>>>           <artifactId>parent</artifactId>
> > >>>>>           <version>1.0</version>
> > >>>>>   </parent>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   <build>
> > >>>>>           <sourceDirectory>src2</sourceDirectory>
> > >>>>>           <plugins>
> > >>>>>                   <plugin>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>><artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >>>>>                   </plugin>
> > >>>>>           </plugins>
> > >>>>>   </build>
> > >>>>></project>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Thanks in advance,
> > >>>>>Peter van de Hoef
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>John Casey wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Sorry, I forgot all about the design decisions surrounding
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>this... :)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Actually, our original decision was to disallow
> > inheritance of any
> > >>>>plugin configuration, since plugin configuration can (and usually
> > >>>>will) modify the build lifecycle for that project. In light
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>of this,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>inherited plugin configuration could lead to somewhat
> > >>>>counter-intuitive build behavior.
> > >>>
> > >>>>We have a <pluginManagement/> section of the POM for common
> > >>>>configuration of plugins for use within a typical
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>multiproject-style
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>setup. It would be used like this:
> > >>>
> > >>>>parent-pom.xml
> > >>>>-------------------
> > >>>>...
> > >>>><pluginManagement>
> > >>>>  <plugins>
> > >>>>    <plugin>
> > >>>>      <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId>
> > >>>>      <artifactId>maven-something-plugin</artifactId>
> > >>>>      <version>1.4</version>
> > >>>>      <configuration>
> > >>>>        <someParam>someValue</someParam>
> > >>>>      </configuration>
> > >>>>    </plugin>
> > >>>>  </plugins>
> > >>>></pluginManagement>
> > >>>>...
> > >>>>-------------------
> > >>>
> > >>>>child-pom.xml
> > >>>>-------------------
> > >>>>...
> > >>>><parent>
> > >>>>  <groupId>test</groupId>              <!-- Pretend that all of
> > >>>>  <artifactId>test-root</artifactId>    | this resolves to the
> > >>>>  <version>1.0</version>                | parent-pom.xml above -->
> > >>>></parent>
> > >>>>...
> > >>>><build>
> > >>>>  <plugins>
> > >>>>    <plugin>
> > >>>>      <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugin</groupId>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>><!-- groupId,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>      <artifactId>maven-something-plugin</artifactId>  |
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>artifactId
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>    </plugin>                                          |
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>enough here.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > --> </build>
> > >>>>...
> > >>>>-------------------
> > >>>
> > >>>>If you need to override some setting from the pluginManagement
> > >>>>section, just specify it locally; more local specification in an
> > >>>>inheritance hierarchy wins.
> > >>>
> > >>>>Will this solve your problem?
> > >>>
> > >>>>HTH,
> > >>>
> > >>>>john
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Peter van de Hoef wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>Thanks for your reply.
> > >>>>>Now I see why the complete <build> section is inherited
> > when it is
> > >>>>>absent in the child:
> > >>>
> > >>>>>   *if* ( childBuild == *null* )
> > >>>>>   {
> > >>>>>       child.setBuild( parentBuild );
> > >>>>>   }
> > >>>>>   *else*
> > >>>>>   {
> > >>>>>       /// A lot of fields are inherited, except <plugins>
> > >>>>>/        }
> > >>>
> > >>>>>I understand that inheriting plugins is problematic, since
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>Maven does
> > >>>
> > >>>>>not 'know' about the plugin parameters and cannot decide their
> > >>>>>inheritance rules.
> > >>>>>Wouldn't it be possible to inherit the complete <plugins>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>section if
> > >>>
> > >>>>>it is not specified in the child, just like you do with
> > <resources>
> > >>>>>and <testResources>?
> > >>>>>That seems IMHO more in line with the situation where
> > there is no
> > >>>>><build> section at all. In that way it is possible to
> > 'tweak' the
> > >>>>>build settings slightly without losing the major build logic.
> > >>>>>- Peter
> > >>>
> > >>>>>Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 21:00 +0200, Peter van de Hoef wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>I have a question about which elements of the POM are
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>inherited by
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>derived POM's.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>The law on inheritance resides here:
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/maven/components/trunk/maven-
> > >>>>>>project/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/project/inheritance/
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>DefaultMod
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>elInheritanceAssembler.java?rev=164217&sortdir=down&view=log
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>In my parent POM I have a <build> section which specifies
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>the source
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>directory and some parameters for the java compiler:
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>><build>
> > >>>>>>>   <sourceDirectory>src</sourceDirectory>
> > >>>>>>>   <plugins>
> > >>>>>>>       <plugin>
> > >>>>>>>           <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
> > >>>>>>>           <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> > >>>>>>>           <version>1.0-alpha-2-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > >>>>>>>           <configuration>
> > >>>>>>>               <source>1.5</source>
> > >>>>>>>               <target>1.5</target>
> > >>>>>>>           </configuration>
> > >>>>>>>       </plugin>
> > >>>>>>>   </plugins>
> > >>>>>>></build>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>In a derived POM, the source directoriy is different, so a new
> > >>>>>>><build> section is specified:
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>><build>
> > >>>>>>>   <sourceDirectory>module/src</sourceDirectory>
> > >>>>>>></build>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>The overridden source directory is effectuated in this
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>second POM,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>but it appears that  the java compiler settings have
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>disappeared (it
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>starts e.g. complaining about JDK 1.4 features like
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>assertions). If
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>I do not specify a <build> section in the derived POM,
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>the settings
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>of the base POM are inherited.
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>It appears that the <build> section is (completely)
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>inherited if it
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>is not present in the derived POM, but if a <build> section is
> > >>>>>>>specified in the derived POM, everything from the base
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>POM is thrown
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>>away and only the settings of the derived POM are used.
> > >>>>>>>Is this correct?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>We selectively choose what to inherit and the
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>configuration for the
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>plug-ins are a little trickier because they free form
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>configurations
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>essentially. We need to do a more careful merge of the
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>configurations
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>but this might not work generally so if we need to allow
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>the plugin
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>to determine how a configuration should be inherited then we'll
> > >>>>>>probably have to come up with some way to decide this
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>using notations
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>we have for plugins. Anyway, I see you posted a JIRA issue
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>so we'll
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>take a look at it.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>---------
> > >>>
> > >>>>>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]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>---------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >>>>>-- 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]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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]
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>>-----------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >>>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]
> >
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iD8DBQFCeP/jK3h2CZwO/4URArckAJ9Lv8DBo65+87mwf6jAKtSk7acbPwCeJ6I2
> > H1xB7lP+X2nSRxzimJOJO24=
> > =XWhd
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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]
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to