Resolved this. Needed to upgrade my JDK. I would rather we had fixed the actual javadoc but this will have to do.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 12:20 PM, Parth Chandra <par...@apache.org> wrote: > Running the build with the apache-release profile still fails with a > different error. (The release script gives the same error). > Anyone have an idea what this one is? A quick web search did not help. > > > mvn clean install -DskipTests -Papache-release > > > ... > > > [INFO] javadoc: error - > com.sun.tools.doclets.internal.toolkit.util.DocletAbortException: > com.sun.tools.javac.code.Symbol$CompletionFailure: class file for > org.junit.runners.model.Statement not found > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:01 AM, Aman Sinha <amansi...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hmm...322 warnings seems too much to address in a day or two. Parth, if >> you are able to complete a build (with warnings but no errors) with the >> branch link that Jyotsna I think we could go ahead with making the change >> in the pom file and fix the warnings post 1.13.0. Any thoughts ? >> >> Also, note that this would mean that anyone who wants to build the source >> with JDK 7 would have to use the 1.12 release. >> >> -Aman >> >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Jyothsna Reddy <jyothsna....@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > When I disabled doclint and there were around 322 java doc warnings. I'm >> > not sure if we can fix all of them and I'm attaching a link to the log >> file >> > that contains all the warnings. Please let me know your thoughts on >> this. >> > >> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GQ6xORr0HkoEmorzvTcl0XZS4NeLX >> > u83/view?usp=sharing >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:39 AM, Jyothsna Reddy <jyothsna....@gmail.com >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> > > I tried to disable it using -Dadditionalparam=-Xdoclint:none. >> Somewhere >> > I >> > > have read that -DXdoclint:none is for older versions of maven. But I'm >> > not >> > > sure of it. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Jyothsna Reddy < >> jyothsna....@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> Following branch has changed related to disabling doclint in pom.xml. >> > >> Please check it out. >> > >> >> > >> https://github.com/dvjyothsna/drill.git DRILL-4547 >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Parth Chandra <par...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> The issue with the failing test in TestDrillbitResilience. >> > >>> cancelAfterAllResultsProduced is similar to DRILL-3967 ( >> > >>> TestDrillbitResilience.cancelAfterEverythingIsCompleted failure). >> > >>> >> > >>> In both this test case, and DRILL-3967, the query is paused (in >> > different >> > >>> places) and a cancel is sent. The query is then resumed and the >> > resulting >> > >>> state is checked. The problem is that the tests have a race >> condition >> > >>> between the cancellation and the resuming of the query. Sometimes >> the >> > >>> resume reaches first and sometimes the cancel reaches first. The >> > failure >> > >>> described by Volodymyr is caused by this race condition. I don't >> know >> > why >> > >>> the test was done like this, but this is an existing problem and >> > >>> shouldn't >> > >>> hold up the release. >> > >>> >> > >>> However, I also see a failure where we encounter an illegal state >> > >>> transition (the query state is CANCELLATION_REQUESTED and the >> Foreman >> > >>> tries >> > >>> to move to an ENQUEUED state). This happens once in about >> twenty-five >> > >>> executions. The Foreman only requests ENQUEUE once, when the query >> is >> > >>> about >> > >>> to start, so this means the cancellation request reached before the >> > query >> > >>> start request. How this happens in the unit test I have not been >> able >> > to >> > >>> determine yet (because it really shouldn't be possible). >> > >>> >> > >>> To recreate the problem I simply added a repeat rule in the class >> and >> > >>> set a >> > >>> repeat count of 1000. The problem occurs easily if the test is run >> from >> > >>> the >> > >>> command line. When running in debug, I was unable to see the >> problem. >> > >>> >> > >>> I'll spend some more time on this, but just in case someone wants to >> > >>> investigate further, feel free ... >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Parth Chandra <par...@apache.org> >> > >>> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> > Not sure if that would work. The release build does not allow >> > >>> uncommitted >> > >>> > files, so I have to commit pom.xml changes to at least the local >> > repo, >> > >>> > which will get pushed to my public repo when the release is done. >> Not >> > >>> > committing this to Apache master would be cheating would leave us >> > with >> > >>> a >> > >>> > build that does not match any source in Apache master? Javadoc >> > >>> generated is >> > >>> > never committed to any repo. It is part of the src release jars, >> > AFAIK. >> > >>> > >> > >>> > Also, I'm not sure where in the pom Jyothsna made the change; I >> added >> > >>> the >> > >>> > -Dxoclint:none to the build section of the apache-release profile >> and >> > >>> java >> > >>> > exec still gives over 100 javadoc errors. >> > >>> > >> > >>> > We have to fix these one of these days. Might as well do it now. >> > >>> Knowing >> > >>> > how it works, if we don't fix these now, someone will be >> scrambling >> > to >> > >>> fix >> > >>> > these just before the 1.14.0 release :( >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Aman Sinha <amansi...@apache.org >> > >> > >>> wrote: >> > >>> > >> > >>> >> Parth, would it work if you made the pom.xml changes locally in >> > your >> > >>> >> branch, generated the javadoc but only commit the javadoc jar >> files >> > >>> to the >> > >>> >> release branch, not the pom.xml changes ? >> > >>> >> Anyone downloading Drill source code to build should not run into >> > this >> > >>> >> since typically they won't be building javadoc. >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> -Aman >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Parth Chandra <par...@apache.org >> > >> > >>> wrote: >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> > Unfortunately, we cannot do that since we also want to be able >> to >> > >>> build >> > >>> >> > with JDK 7 for at least a couple of releases to allow for a >> > >>> reasonable >> > >>> >> > transition time. doclint was introduced in JDK 8 so JDK 7 >> fails >> > >>> >> because it >> > >>> >> > doesn't recognize the parameter. >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:03 AM, Jyothsna Reddy < >> > >>> jyothsna....@gmail.com> >> > >>> >> > wrote: >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > > Regarding DRILL-4547, I used Vladimir's branch(DRILL-1491) >> and >> > >>> added >> > >>> >> > > following lines to pom.xml to disable doc lint. The javadoc >> > >>> doesn't >> > >>> >> throw >> > >>> >> > > any errors and the build is successful. >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > <activation> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > <jdk>[1.8,)</jdk> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > </activation> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > <properties> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > <additionalparam>-Xdoclint:none</additionalparam> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > </properties> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Hanumath Rao Maduri < >> > >>> >> hanu....@gmail.com> >> > >>> >> > > wrote: >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > > > On my machine I couldn't repro the issue related to >> > >>> >> > > TestDrillbitResilience. >> > >>> >> > > > cancelAfterAllResultsProduced. >> > >>> >> > > > I used the vladimir's branch (i.e DRILL-1491). >> > >>> >> > > > Used the maven test command for testing it. >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > output of the test run. >> > >>> >> > > > ... 4 common frames omitted >> > >>> >> > > > Tests run: 20, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 6, Time >> > elapsed: >> > >>> >> > 124.187 >> > >>> >> > > > sec - in org.apache.drill.exec.server.T >> estDrillbitResilience >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:00 AM, Parth Chandra < >> > >>> par...@apache.org> >> > >>> >> > > wrote: >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > Yes I agree. JDBC would be a new feature that we can >> defer >> > to >> > >>> >> 1.14.0. >> > >>> >> > > > > I'm hoping we can resolve the other three in the next few >> > >>> days. >> > >>> >> > Target >> > >>> >> > > > date >> > >>> >> > > > > for starting release process - Friday Mar 9th >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > Once these are resolved, I will create a branch for the >> > >>> release so >> > >>> >> > that >> > >>> >> > > > > Apache master remains open for commits. If any issues are >> > >>> found in >> > >>> >> > the >> > >>> >> > > > > release branch, we will fix them in master and I will >> > >>> cherry-pick >> > >>> >> the >> > >>> >> > > > into >> > >>> >> > > > > the release branch. Once the release is finalized I will >> > add a >> > >>> >> > release >> > >>> >> > > > tag >> > >>> >> > > > > and remove the branch. >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > Also note if QA folks want to get started on testing the >> > >>> release, >> > >>> >> the >> > >>> >> > > > > current head of Apache master is close to final. Javadoc >> > >>> >> generation >> > >>> >> > is >> > >>> >> > > > only >> > >>> >> > > > > a release build issue, and the other issues are >> localized >> > to >> > >>> >> > specific >> > >>> >> > > > > cases. >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > Note: to reproduce the javadoc issues: >> > >>> >> > > > > # set JAVA_HOME to JDK 8 >> > >>> >> > > > > mvn javadoc:javadoc -Papache-release >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:23 PM, Aman Sinha < >> > >>> amansi...@apache.org >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > > > wrote: >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > It seems to me the main blockers are: >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > 1. DRILL-4547 Javadoc fails with Java8 <-- Can we >> > >>> split up >> > >>> >> the >> > >>> >> > > > work >> > >>> >> > > > > > among few people to resolve these ? >> > >>> >> > > > > > 2. DRILL-6216 Metadata mismatch.. <-- >> Agreement >> > >>> was >> > >>> >> to >> > >>> >> > > > revert >> > >>> >> > > > > > one small piece of code and it appears Sorabh is >> looking >> > >>> into it >> > >>> >> > > > > > 3. TestDrillbitResilience.cancelA >> fterAllResultsProduced >> > >>> <-- >> > >>> >> need >> > >>> >> > > > > someone >> > >>> >> > > > > > to look into this >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > Regarding the JDBC issues that Parth mentioned, >> looking at >> > >>> the >> > >>> >> > JIRAs, >> > >>> >> > > > it >> > >>> >> > > > > > seems they are not showstoppers...Parth do you agree ? >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > Since we are close to the finish line for JDK 8, IMO we >> > >>> should >> > >>> >> try >> > >>> >> > > and >> > >>> >> > > > > see >> > >>> >> > > > > > if in another day or two we can get over these hurdles. >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > -Aman >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:17 AM, Pritesh Maker < >> > >>> pma...@mapr.com> >> > >>> >> > > wrote: >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > The JDK 8 issues will likely require more time to >> harden >> > >>> for >> > >>> >> it >> > >>> >> > to >> > >>> >> > > be >> > >>> >> > > > > > > included in the 1.13 release. My recommendation >> would be >> > >>> to >> > >>> >> move >> > >>> >> > > > ahead >> > >>> >> > > > > > with >> > >>> >> > > > > > > the 1.13 release now and address these issues right. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Pritesh >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > >>> >> > > > > > > From: Parth Chandra <par...@apache.org> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Sent: March 7, 2018 3:34 AM >> > >>> >> > > > > > > To: dev <dev@drill.apache.org> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] 1.13.0 release >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > My mistake Volodymyr. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Found some other JDK 8 issues in JIRA not tracked in >> > >>> >> DRILL-1491 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-4547 Javadoc fails with Java8 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-6163 Switch Travis To Java 8 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > The following are tracked in DRILL-1491, but it >> doesn't >> > >>> look >> > >>> >> like >> > >>> >> > > > we're >> > >>> >> > > > > > > addressing these. Are we? >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-4329 13 Unit tests are failing with JDK 8 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-4333 DRILL-4329 tests in >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Drill2489CallsAfterCloseThrowExceptionsTest fail in >> > Java >> > >>> 8 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-5120 Upgrade JDBC Driver for new Java 8 >> > methods >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-5680 BasicPhysicalOpUnitTest can't run in >> > >>> Eclipse >> > >>> >> with >> > >>> >> > > > Java >> > >>> >> > > > > 8 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > *DRILL-4547 is a showstopper*. The release build >> > >>> >> > (-Papache-release) >> > >>> >> > > > > fails >> > >>> >> > > > > > > with far too many Javadoc errors even with doc lint >> > turned >> > >>> >> off. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > DRILL-4333, DRILL-4329, DRILL-5120 are JDBC related >> > which >> > >>> is a >> > >>> >> > > > project >> > >>> >> > > > > by >> > >>> >> > > > > > > itself. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Note that fixing JDBC related issues and adding the >> > >>> command >> > >>> >> line >> > >>> >> > > > option >> > >>> >> > > > > > to >> > >>> >> > > > > > > turn doc lint off will likely break Java 7 builds. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Folks who voted to get JDK 8 into this release, what >> is >> > >>> the >> > >>> >> > > consensus >> > >>> >> > > > > on >> > >>> >> > > > > > > JDBC/Java8 ? >> > >>> >> > > > > > > Also, any volunteers on helping debug >> > >>> >> > > > > > > TestDrillbitResilience.cancelAfterAllResultsProduced >> > >>> >> > > > > > > ? >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Volodymyr Tkach < >> > >>> >> > > > vovatkac...@gmail.com >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > Addition to my last message: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > The link with PR for DRILL-1491 >> > >>> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint >> > >>> >> > . >> > >>> >> > > > > > > com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github. >> > >>> com_apache_drill_pull_1143&d= >> > >>> >> > > DwIBaQ&c= >> > >>> >> > > > > > > cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=zySISmkmM4WNViCKijENtQ&m= >> > >>> >> > > oTnKwfjj5hFBosMrq_ >> > >>> >> > > > > > > WWhazhGeoC2nGSKeMOPxU2_cM&s=p3 >> > >>> uialdRhgnf3XRY22R4SWXGZIq66a >> > >>> >> > > > > > Pijuy-Ms0J_-4&e= >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > on which the we can see TestDrillbitResilience. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > cancelAfterAllResultsProduced >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > failure. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > 2018-03-07 11:45 GMT+02:00 Volodymyr Tkach < >> > >>> >> > > vovatkac...@gmail.com >> > >>> >> > > > >: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > *To Parth:* >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > The failure can only be seen if run on DRILL-1491 >> > >>> branch, >> > >>> >> > > because >> > >>> >> > > > > it >> > >>> >> > > > > > > uses >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > jdk 1.8 in pom.xml >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > <source>1.8</source> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > <target>1.8</target> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > 2018-03-07 6:03 GMT+02:00 Sorabh Hamirwasia < >> > >>> >> > > > shamirwa...@mapr.com >> > >>> >> > > > > >: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Just sent an email on RCA of DRILL-6216 to >> discuss >> > >>> next >> > >>> >> > steps. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Thanks, >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Sorabh >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> ________________________________ >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> From: Parth Chandra <par...@apache.org> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 6:48:21 PM >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> To: dev >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] 1.13.0 release >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> We have two items remaining - >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> DRILL-1491 - Ideally, I would like to make sure >> > that >> > >>> >> CANCEL >> > >>> >> > is >> > >>> >> > > > > > handled >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> correctly with JDK 8. If the failure of the unit >> > >>> test is >> > >>> >> > > because >> > >>> >> > > > > the >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> cancel >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> is received after the query is completed, then >> the >> > >>> issue >> > >>> >> is >> > >>> >> > > less >> > >>> >> > > > > > > severe, >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> but I would like to be sure that this is the >> case. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Are there others who see the DrillbitResilience >> > tests >> > >>> >> > failing >> > >>> >> > > > for >> > >>> >> > > > > > > them? >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Can >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> we try to assist Volodymyr? I don't see the >> > failures >> > >>> >> myself. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> DRILL-6216 - this is a showstopper. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Kunal Khatua < >> > >>> >> > > > > kunalkha...@gmail.com >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> wrote: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Hi Parth >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > DRILL-6216 is a release blocker that is being >> > >>> currently >> > >>> >> > > looked >> > >>> >> > > > > > into. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Ref: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > DRILL-6216: Metadata mismatch when connecting >> to >> > a >> > >>> >> Drill >> > >>> >> > > > 1.12.0 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > with a >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Drill-1.13.0-SNAPSHOT driver >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > https://urldefense.proofpoint. >> > >>> >> > com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues >> > >>> >> > > . >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> apache.org_jira_browse_DRILL-2D6216&d=DwIBaQ&c= >> > >>> >> > cskdkSMqhcnjZ >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> xdQVpwTXg&r=gRpEl0WzXE3EMrwj0KFbZXGXRyadOt >> > >>> >> > hF2jlYxvhTlQg&m=xu >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> Rz02Sbprxvbtw1OrBuDvlRbp2lh9mz >> > >>> >> > 3sxpP5-wHPs&s=txeKaKzF67flAi48 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> DUNLgMWbxje1GXWxfFpG6BEPXk0&e= >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Please add it to the list of required commits >> as >> > >>> well. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Thanks >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > ~ Kunal >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > On 3/6/2018 9:53:06 AM, Volodymyr Tkach < >> > >>> >> > > > vovatkac...@gmail.com> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > wrote: >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Right now i haven't found the reason of >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > TestDrillbitResilience.cancelA >> > >>> fterAllResultsProduced >> > >>> >> > > failure, >> > >>> >> > > > > > most >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> likely >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > the cause of the failure is that the query is >> > able >> > >>> to >> > >>> >> have >> > >>> >> > > > been >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> completed >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > before cancellation request is processed. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > This test not only the case, there is one more >> > >>> ignored >> > >>> >> > test >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > TestDrillbitResilience.cancelA >> > >>> >> fterEverythingIsCompleted >> > >>> >> > and >> > >>> >> > > > > jira >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > DRILL-3967 >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > created, although the environment is AWS. >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > Maybe it makes sense to ignore this test to >> > >>> unblock the >> > >>> >> > > > release >> > >>> >> > > > > > and >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> merge >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > JDK8 changes? >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> >> > >>> > >> > >>> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >
