Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0 On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and >also a test into mobile spec) today. > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line. > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine. >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2. > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on! > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing. What I do care about is >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android >>devices. >> >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures >> >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out. I'm OK with tagging >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm >>wondering >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well. >> >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the >>JS >>earlier. >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one. >>> >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue. >>> >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged. >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II. Testing >>>appears to >>> >be completely inconsistent. I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy >>>Nexus >>> >and see if I get the same results. >>> > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread. The thing is that on my >>> >>Galaxy >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a >>> >>>couple >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that >>> >>>saves, >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people >>> >>>have. I >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO. Why >>> >>>did it >>> >>> >jump up like that? >>> >>> > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on >>>Android. >>> >>>21 >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the >>> >>>same >>> >>> >>for >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 >>>directory, >>> >>> then >>> >>> >> tag the docs. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just >>> >>>picking >>> >>> a >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been >>>working >>> >>> >>with >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing >>> >>> anything >>> >>> >> >new. >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in >>> >>>cordova-js >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to >>>stop >>> >>> >>working >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this >>> >>>project. >>> >>> >>We >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable >>> >>>testing >>> >>> >>on >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms. >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what >>> >>>happens? >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen >>> >>> >> >><[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> None. >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1? >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >> >>> Jesse >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5 >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> > None >>> >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <[email protected]>: >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections? >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3? >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj >>><[email protected]> >>> >>> >>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag? >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry >>> >>>before >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :) >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, >>>we >>> >>> >>should be >>> >>> >> >>> good >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya? >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel >>> >>>callback >>> >>> >>test >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all >>>check >>> >>> >>out, so >>> >>> >> >>>the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37 >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The >>>manual >>> >>> >>tests >>> >>> >> >>>for >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there >>>seems >>> >>>to >>> >>> >>be a >>> >>> >> >>> little >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking >>>into >>> >>> that. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to >>>tag. We >>> >>> >>pass >>> >>> >> >>>on >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0). >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to >>> >>>reproduce + >>> >>> >>fix >>> >>> >> >>>what >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" >>> >>> >> >>><[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to >>> >>>have a >>> >>> >> >>>long >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Jesse >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5 >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser >>> >>><[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android. I'll put it >>> >>>back >>> >>> >>when >>> >>> >> >>>we >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out! >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters < >>> >>> >> >>> [email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB. >>>Seeing >>> >>>some >>> >>> >>odd >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6. Not sure if >>>it >>> >>>is >>> >>> >>my >>> >>> >> >>>test >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux >>> >>> >><[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from >>>cordova-js >>> >>>and >>> >>> >> >>> integrated >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests >>>failing. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in >>>1.7. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just >>>have to >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0 >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" >>><[email protected]> >>> >>> >>wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag >>>reset >>> >>> >> >>>discussion? >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj >>> >>> >> >>><[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB >>> >>>code so >>> >>> >> >>>I'll >>> >>> >> >>> let >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all >>> >>>good >>> >>> to >>> >>> >> >>>tag >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release? >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 >>>tags. We >>> >>> >> >>>haven't >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there >>>shouldn't >>> >>>be a >>> >>> >> >>>problem >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj >>>< >>> >>> >> >>> [email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged >>> >>>cordova.js >>> >>> >> >>>file is >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual >>>process >>> >>>of >>> >>> >> >>>checking >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file >>> >>>over >>> >>> to >>> >>> >> >>>the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern >>>then >>> >>> >> >>>certainly, >>> >>> >> >>> the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js >>>was >>> >>>added >>> >>> >>4 >>> >>> >> >>>days >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago, >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2 >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what >>>happened >>> >>> >>there. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered >>> >>>properly >>> >>> >>and >>> >>> >> >>>the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 >>> >>> >>release, >>> >>> >> >>>that >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest >>>commit >>> >>> >>(that >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least >>>in >>> >>>the >>> >>> >> >>>right >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform >>> >>> >>implementations >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0 >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I >>>say we >>> >>> tag >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js >>>into >>> >>>the >>> >>> >> >>>various >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release. It is >>> >>>also >>> >>> >>error >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone - >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every >>>time >>> >>> >>there >>> >>> >> >>>is a >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build >>> >>>script >>> >>> >> >>>handle >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this? >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, >>>we >>> >>>are >>> >>> >>all >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in >>>our >>> >>>own >>> >>> >>ways. >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon >>> >>>MacDonald >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day >>> >>>bug in >>> >>> >>our >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good >>>to >>> >>>get >>> >>> >> >>>this >>> >>> >> >>> bug >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >
