logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com>
Subject Re: Roadmap for 2.8.1
Date Wed, 08 Mar 2017 09:45:07 GMT
OK, I have updated the log4j-scala repo to bump version to 11.0, and note
in README about independent versioning. It should now be ready for release.
Who will do the release?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 8:06 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> Yes. Scala should be released asap and the site manually modified to point
> to it. We would then modify the log4j source to permanently point there.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Mar 7, 2017, at 10:09 AM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ralph pointed out that we can't make a release of the main repo without
> the scala modules until there is a release of the scala modules on their
> own. Otherwise, there'd be a regression in the main repo by removing
> modules that were there before.
>
> On 7 March 2017 at 10:54, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No objection from me to release log4j-scala.
>>
>> Do you have a versioning scheme that lets log4j-scala and log4j upgrade
>> independently?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2017, at 1:42, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.staldal@magine.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Can we release log4j-scala now? Or to we have to wait for the next
>> release of main repo with Scala modules removed? Should we remove the Scala
>> modules from main repo now?
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The Scala language versions is already done the same standard way
>>> everyone implements Scala libraries (hence the strange naming scheme we
>>> already have). I'd imagine that the versions can be completely decoupled by
>>> specifying a minimum Log4j API version it requires (though should generally
>>> be whatever the latest was at release) and bumping its own version as new
>>> features or bugfixes are added. I'd like to see that follow semantic
>>> versioning properly, too.
>>>
>>> On 3 March 2017 at 06:15, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.staldal@magine.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I guess the idea is that releases of Log4j 2 and log4j-scala should be
>>>> independent in both ways, right?
>>>>
>>>> I think I have coordination between log4j-scala and Scala language
>>>> covered already.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mikael, you probably need to plan your versioning scheme to handle any
>>>>> combination of the following:
>>>>> * log4j 2 releases: do you want to do a release for the log4j-scala modules
>>>>> every time? E.g., when we go from 2.8.1 to 2.8.2? My understanding is
that
>>>>> once they are decoupled, the log4j-scala modules won't be released
>>>>> automatically with log4j anymore, someone needs to do the work for
>>>>> a log4j-scala release separately.
>>>>> * Scala releases: how do you want to sync up with Scala language
>>>>> versions? (I guess include major&minor Scala version in the log4j-scala
>>>>> module version)
>>>>> * log4j-scala module versions: enhancements to these modules,
>>>>> independent of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 3, 2017, at 9:10, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.staldal@magine.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to keep package and artifact names, and bump version to
>>>>> 11.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 1, 2017 4:04 PM, "Matt Sicker" <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you change artifact ids, it's generally a good idea to change
>>>>>> packages, too. I've had issues in the past with Feign for instance
because
>>>>>> they changed groupId/artifactId at one point but kept the same API,
so I
>>>>>> had two copies on the classpath until I found out there was a duplicate
and
>>>>>> excluded them (though admittedly not a problem in OSGi environments
:P).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1 March 2017 at 07:47, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can do that, but that will probably confuse users too. I
would
>>>>>>> suggest changing the artifactId and then start at either 1.0
or 2.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2017, at 6:09 AM, Mikael Ståldal <
>>>>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK, but then at least we have to start with a version > 2.8.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Apache <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guarantee if you try to keep the same versioning you will
regret
>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 1, 2017, at 2:22 AM, Mikael Ståldal <
>>>>>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was under the impression that we were not ready to integrate
the
>>>>>>>> site from log4j-scala. That's why I considered the release
of log4j-scala
>>>>>>>> as delayed, since there is no point of releasing it if we
cannot get the
>>>>>>>> site integrated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But now when Ralph says he's ready to integrate the site,
I guess
>>>>>>>> we can go ahead and release log4j-scala.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't like the idea of having separate versioning for
>>>>>>>> log4j-scala, that will be confusing since we have already
started with the
>>>>>>>> same versioning as Log4j. Log4j-scala also have a dependency
on log4j-api,
>>>>>>>> and I think we want to keep that in sync.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One issue we came across in practice is that Scala 2.12
requires
>>>>>>>>> Java 8, but we don't want to require that for the entire
build, so we
>>>>>>>>> separated the repo. This also helps avoid making the
main log4j repo from
>>>>>>>>> taking forever to build and release which can help the
RERO idea. Plus,
>>>>>>>>> these non-core modules don't change nearly as often as
log4j-core or
>>>>>>>>> log4j-api, so they don't really need new releases all
that often.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 28 February 2017 at 01:44, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To be honest I still don't understand
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> * the vision of what we ultimately want to achieve
>>>>>>>>>> * how different repos fit into that vision
>>>>>>>>>> * what different websites we are planning to create
to give users
>>>>>>>>>> access to these different modules
>>>>>>>>>> * what websites are going to be driven from which
modules or
>>>>>>>>>> projects
>>>>>>>>>> * who of us is going to be driving what aspect of
the above
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My lack of understanding is not just limited to the
Scala modules
>>>>>>>>>> but is about the whole splitting up the release.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps a diagram would help clarify my understanding.
(I think
>>>>>>>>>> there's already a JIRA or an epic for the above.
Adding some diagrams there
>>>>>>>>>> would be very useful.)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Remko
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:26 Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd be in favour of starting a new release train
for the Log4j
>>>>>>>>>>> Scala APIs. Not exactly sure which version to
start from, though.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 27 February 2017 at 18:35, Ralph Goers <
>>>>>>>>>>> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you use that excuse they will never get released
as it
>>>>>>>>>>> creates a catch-22.  If I release without them
then we have a regression
>>>>>>>>>>> until they are released.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is why you shouldn’t really be releasing
them using the
>>>>>>>>>>> Log4j versions. Change the artifactIds so they
can start at 1.0, 2.0 or
>>>>>>>>>>> whatever.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Once you create the release and deploy it to
the web site I can
>>>>>>>>>>> modify the web site to point to it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 5:19 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, you included 2.10 and 2.11 in 2.8.1-rc1
which kind of
>>>>>>>>>>> makes it harder to release from the log4j-scala
repo when two of the three
>>>>>>>>>>> artifacts will already exist.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 27 February 2017 at 12:14, Ralph Goers <
>>>>>>>>>>> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why is the release of log4j-scala delayed?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Mikael Ståldal
<
>>>>>>>>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I would really like LOG4J2-1661 and LOG4J2-1690
out in the next
>>>>>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I implemented LOG4J2-1690 only in the new log4j-scala
repo since
>>>>>>>>>>> I thought that it would be released as part of
2.8, otherwise I would have
>>>>>>>>>>> put it to the main repo as well. But now releasing
of the log4j-scala repo
>>>>>>>>>>> has been delayed and I start to get disappointed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Matt Sicker
<boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Relative symlinks would work for that regardless
of version.
>>>>>>>>>>> Option 1 it is, then?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 February 2017 at 00:22, Apache <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Note that the link in the log4j site can reference
a symlink so
>>>>>>>>>>> that the log4j site never has to change when
the Scala site is updated.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2017, at 11:21 PM, Apache <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Option 2 makes no sense to me.  I don’t plan
on being the
>>>>>>>>>>> release manager for log4j-scala. In order for
me to implement option 2 I
>>>>>>>>>>> would have to include the log4j-scala site into
the log4j release process -
>>>>>>>>>>> as well as log4j-examples, etc if they move out.
That is just not doable.
>>>>>>>>>>> Deploying the Scala site parallel to log4j makes
it much easier to maintain
>>>>>>>>>>> independently of log4j.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2017, at 11:15 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The site repository is laid out like this:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> log4j/2.x/ -(symlink)-> log4j-2.8/
>>>>>>>>>>> log4j/log4j-2.8/log4j-api/
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>> log4j/2.x/log4j-api-scala_2.11/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Option 1 is to put it here instead:
>>>>>>>>>>> log4j/scala/2.x/log4j-api-scala_2.11/ (or some
variant; that's
>>>>>>>>>>> a pretty ugly URL honestly)
>>>>>>>>>>> log4j/2.x/log4j-api-scala_2.11/ -(symlink)->
above directory
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Option 2 is to commit the scala site where it
is now, but you'd
>>>>>>>>>>> have to manage it alongside log4j core releases.
Option 1 still requires
>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance, too.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 February 2017 at 00:05, Apache <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is a specific location in svn where the
site pages have to
>>>>>>>>>>> be committed, so I don’t really understand
option 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2017, at 9:48 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I see two ways of doing that, though:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Commit the Scala site in a separate directory
similar to what
>>>>>>>>>>> I started doing with Log4j Boot. Add redirect
pages or rewrite rules via
>>>>>>>>>>> .htaccess if possible to keep links from breaking.
>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Commit the Scala site where it would go when
creating the
>>>>>>>>>>> main site. Depending on how you update the files
in svn for a site update,
>>>>>>>>>>> could this be more annoying to maintain?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 24 February 2017 at 22:30, Apache <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From my perspective that doesn’t matter. However,
we would
>>>>>>>>>>> really need a Scala site before we can modify
the Log4j site, otherwise it
>>>>>>>>>>> will be a dead link.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All that really needs to happen is the Scala
site needs to be
>>>>>>>>>>> checked in adjacent to the Log4j 2 site. Then
the Log4j 2 site just has a
>>>>>>>>>>> link to the Scala site from the main menu. The
two sites won’t really be
>>>>>>>>>>> “integrated” - they will just have links
to each other.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2017, at 5:02 PM, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is cosmetic, but we'd also be adding the Scala
2.12 module.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 24 February 2017 at 14:17, Apache <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don’t have the numbers but I have a couple
of issues that need
>>>>>>>>>>> fixes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The modules stuff doesn’t require a major version
bump. It is
>>>>>>>>>>> mostly cosmetic.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>>>>>>> garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think we can do 2.8.1 with our current bug
fixes. Moving
>>>>>>>>>>> modules around feels like a 2.9 item to me but
that's just me. I really
>>>>>>>>>>> like the idea of making bug fixes available ASAP.
The only issue I see that
>>>>>>>>>>> fixing now is the null classloader issue for
which we have a patch but it
>>>>>>>>>>> does not work for me (see JIRA).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Matt Sicker
<boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping we can get this released soon as we
have some
>>>>>>>>>>> bugfixes and such ready to go. I also want to
move forward with 2.9 changes
>>>>>>>>>>> but don't really want to deal with creating a
2.9 branch or forking master
>>>>>>>>>>> into a 2.8 branch. Let's go over anything left
to do for 2.8.1:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * Integrated log4j-api-scala website into main
site
>>>>>>>>>>> * Remove scala modules from logging-log4j2 repo
>>>>>>>>>>> * Release scala modules from logging-log4j-scala
repo
>>>>>>>>>>> (presumably shortly after releasing 2.8.1 of
core?)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I also have ideas on what we can shoot for in
2.9 and beyond,
>>>>>>>>>>> but that's for another day. I think getting everything
working properly in
>>>>>>>>>>> Java 9 would be a good thing to start doing soon
so we can figure out if
>>>>>>>>>>> our APIs will still work properly in the future
or if we need to break
>>>>>>>>>>> backwards compatibility. Although, multi-jar
support could help in
>>>>>>>>>>> migrating the API if needed for 9+, though that
would be a rather
>>>>>>>>>>> unorthodox abuse of the feature.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1617290459/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1617290459&linkCode=as2&tag=garygregory-20&linkId=cadb800f39946ec62ea2b1af9fe6a2b8>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=garygregory-20&l=am2&o=1&a=1617290459>
>>>>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1935182021/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1935182021&linkCode=as2&tag=garygregory-20&linkId=31ecd1f6b6d1eaf8886ac902a24de418%22>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=garygregory-20&l=am2&o=1&a=1935182021>
>>>>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1935182951/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1935182951&linkCode=%7B%7BlinkCode%7D%7D&tag=garygregory-20&linkId=%7B%7Blink_id%7D%7D%22%3ESpring+Batch+in+Action>
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=garygregory-20&l=am2&o=1&a=1935182951>
>>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>>>>>>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>>>>>>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com
>>>>>>>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden
 |   www.magine.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may
be contained in
>>>>>>>>>>> this message. If you are not the addressee indicated
in this message
>>>>>>>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to
such a person),
>>>>>>>>>>> you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone.
In such case,
>>>>>>>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify
the sender by
>>>>>>>>>>> reply email.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>>>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>>>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com
>>>>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained
in this
>>>>>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>>>>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person),
you
>>>>>>>> may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>>>>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender
by
>>>>>>>> reply email.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com
>>>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in
this
>>>>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>>>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person),
you
>>>>>>> may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>>>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender
by
>>>>>>> reply email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>
>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>
>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>> mikael.staldal@magine.com
>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>>>
>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may
>>>> not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
>>>> email.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> [image: MagineTV]
>>
>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>> Senior software developer
>>
>> *Magine TV*
>> mikael.staldal@magine.com
>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>
>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may
>> not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
>> email.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>
>
>


-- 
[image: MagineTV]

*Mikael Ståldal*
Senior software developer

*Magine TV*
mikael.staldal@magine.com
Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com

Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
(or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not
copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
email.

Mime
View raw message