We need to discuss branch-1 policy regarding builds against Hadoop 3.0.0. See HBASE-19421
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419 > > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> No problem, please commit it. >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zghao...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about >>> the >>> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks. >>> >>> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>: >>> >>> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience >>> waiting on >>> > fix Andrew. >>> > St.Ack >>> > >>> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > No problem, committing it now >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov < >>> > sergeysolda...@gmail.com >>> > > > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > Andrew, >>> > > > >>> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very >>> > simple >>> > > > fix. >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks, >>> > > > Sergey >>> > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> apurt...@apache.org> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > Not too late, no >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew. >>> > > > > > St.Ack >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. >>> It is >>> > > > > present >>> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is >>> > > intermittent. I >>> > > > > am >>> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I >>> > > > withdraw >>> > > > > my >>> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Thanks, >>> > > > > > > S >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> > > apurt...@apache.org >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of >>> > > > > HBASE-9465 >>> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll >>> also >>> > > revert >>> > > > > > that >>> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> > > > apurt...@apache.org> >>> > > > > > >> wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by >>> > > > > HBASE-19379. >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is >>> probably why >>> > > it >>> > > > > > >> slipped >>> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and >>> it >>> > was >>> > > > > still >>> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. >>> Will >>> > get >>> > > > to >>> > > > > > the >>> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly. >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> > > > > apurt...@apache.org> >>> > > > > > >> > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me >>> before I >>> > > went >>> > > > > out >>> > > > > > on >>> > > > > > >> >> vacation. >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net >>> > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks. >>> > > > > > >> >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and >>> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction >>> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of >>> hadoopqa >>> > runs >>> > > > and >>> > > > > > on >>> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs. >>> > > > > > >> >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and >>> 2.0. >>> > > Got >>> > > > > > >> >>> distracted >>> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this.... >>> > > > > > >> >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> S >>> > > > > > >> >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> > > > > > apurt...@apache.org> >>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack < >>> st...@duboce.net> >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in >>> 1.2 >>> > and >>> > > > 1.3. >>> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and >>> down >>> > > > > branch-1. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi < >>> > > > > > >> >>> psomo...@cloudera.com> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :) >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> > > > > > >> >>> apurt...@apache.org> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. >>> :-/ >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey < >>> > > > > > >> bus...@apache.org >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew! >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew >>> Purtell >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out >>> next >>> > > week >>> > > > > for >>> > > > > > >> the >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in >>> > December. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be >>> available. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT >>> check, >>> > > > > release >>> > > > > > >> >>> audits, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > and >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf >>> comparison >>> > > with >>> > > > > 1.2 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling >>> with >>> > > > JFR, >>> > > > > > >> >>> comparison >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > with >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing >>> > > outcome >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, >>> if we >>> > > > need a >>> > > > > > RC1 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please >>> refrain >>> > > > from >>> > > > > > >> >>> committing >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or >>> changes to >>> > > > public >>> > > > > > >> APIs >>> > > > > > >> >>> to >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew >>> > Purtell < >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the >>> shaded >>> > > client >>> > > > > > using >>> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > so >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as >>> > well >>> > > as >>> > > > > > >> >>> complete a >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew >>> > Purtell < >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and >>> 1.3 >>> > > > and/or >>> > > > > > >> 1.2. >>> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li < >>> > > > > > car...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress! >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance >>> comparison >>> > > with >>> > > > > > >> current >>> > > > > > >> >>> > stable >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new >>> branch, >>> > > but >>> > > > > > >> should >>> > > > > > >> >>> we do >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > to >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write >>> performance >>> > > > > > regression >>> > > > > > >> >>> from >>> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)? >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new >>> > > version >>> > > > > for >>> > > > > > >> >>> product >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > env >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most >>> users >>> > > > > (please >>> > > > > > >> >>> forgive >>> > > > > > >> >>> > my >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for >>> this). >>> > > > Thanks. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed >>> branching >>> > for >>> > > > 1.4 >>> > > > > > Yu >>> > > > > > >> Li >>> > > > > > >> >>> > asked >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this... >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping >>> the >>> > > > > promise >>> > > > > > >> boss >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile). >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew >>> > Purtell >>> > > < >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurt...@apache.org >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4 >>> class >>> > > AWS >>> > > > > > >> instance >>> > > > > > >> >>> 25 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > times >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm >>> > aiming >>> > > > for >>> > > > > > 100 >>> > > > > > >> >>> runs. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for >>> > constructing >>> > > a >>> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > change >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with >>> > release >>> > > > > > audits >>> > > > > > >> >>> enabled >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support >>> yesterday >>> > > and >>> > > > > will >>> > > > > > >> now >>> > > > > > >> >>> look >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > at >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important >>> > > issues. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before >>> 1.4.0 >>> > > goes >>> > > > > out >>> > > > > > so >>> > > > > > >> >>> that >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching >>> for >>> > > 1.4 >>> > > > Yu >>> > > > > > Li >>> > > > > > >> >>> asked >>> > > > > > >> >>> > for >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this: >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book. >>> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> we >>> > > > > > >> >>> > will >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a >>> backwards-compatible >>> > > > manner) >>> > > > > > in >>> > > > > > >> >>> minor >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line >>> > description >>> > > > on >>> > > > > > the >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added) >>> > > between >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4 >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which >>> version to >>> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or >>> > > release >>> > > > > > note >>> > > > > > >> of >>> > > > > > >> >>> the >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write >>> it >>> > up >>> > > > > while >>> > > > > > >> the >>> > > > > > >> >>> RC is >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be >>> > performed >>> > > > on >>> > > > > a >>> > > > > > >> small >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries. >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...) >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> -- >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the >>> > crosstalk, >>> > > > > > meaning >>> > > > > > >> >>> torn >>> > > > > > >> >>> > from >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> -- >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the >>> crosstalk, >>> > > > meaning >>> > > > > > torn >>> > > > > > >> >>> from >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, >>> > > meaning >>> > > > > > torn >>> > > > > > >> >>> from >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > -- >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, >>> meaning >>> > > > torn >>> > > > > > from >>> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > -- >>> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning >>> torn >>> > > from >>> > > > > > >> truth's >>> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >>> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> -- >>> > > > > > >> >> Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> >> Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn >>> > from >>> > > > > > truth's >>> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > -- >>> > > > > > >> > Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> > Andrew >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn >>> from >>> > > > > truth's >>> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> -- >>> > > > > > >> Best regards, >>> > > > > > >> Andrew >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn >>> from >>> > > > truth's >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > -- >>> > > > > Best regards, >>> > > > > Andrew >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from >>> > truth's >>> > > > > decrepit hands >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Best regards, >>> > > Andrew >>> > > >>> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from >>> truth's >>> > > decrepit hands >>> > > - A23, Crosstalk >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Andrew >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's >> decrepit hands >> - A23, Crosstalk >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrew > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > decrepit hands > - A23, Crosstalk > -- Best regards, Andrew Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's decrepit hands - A23, Crosstalk
