Creating a create-release-branch.sh script is a good idea for sure. And I agree, if you edited POMs by hand, then a PR was needed.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:58 AM Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@apache.org> wrote: > I think a middle-ground can be agreed upon. This was my first time going > through this process, and I was grateful for Duo's suggestions. I actually > was not aware of the maven commands you guys gave, and this process of > updating the version is not documented anywhere in our guide. I just tried > looking back in the git history for what changes were made for > other releases, and ended up manually editing the pom. The change is > trivial, but I also wasn't 100% sure it was comprehensive given the lack of > docs. So I was also grateful for the review. Going forward as I get more > comfortable with creating releases, maybe I'll be more in the camp of > wanting to streamline the process. It sort of depends on the > seniority/confidence of the RM. > > I agree that even without a jenkins job, it'd be nice to have a > create-release-branch.sh which simply does the git commands I listed above, > along with maven set revision and committing that change. At the very > least, updating the doc would be good. I'll try to remember to do that when > I have time. > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:24 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Maven automates the change so the human does not edit the POM files by > > hand. A PR to check this is wasteful of people’s time because a reviewer > is > > just signing off on a change made by a tool and won’t check the details > > (this is human nature) and the RM is sitting around for who knows how > long > > waiting for the sign off (this is the actual problem) and as you know the > > process for making a release is very lengthy already. > > > > Apache release requirements forbid use of Jenkins to generate release > > artifacts. There are various conversations about this in the archives of > > infrastructure@ or members@ or perhaps someone like Nick more directly > > involved with build infrastructure has more context. Something to do with > > automated pipelines can be hacked and having humans doing enough by hand > > that they can really attest to the results provides more assurance. > > > > PRs are valuable and necessary most of the time because the changes are > > made by humans and are nontrivial and hugely benefit from review by > another > > person. But PRs for signing off on changes made by tools are not. > > > > > On Nov 29, 2023, at 11:20 PM, 张铎 <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > That's the problem! Now we use $revision for better command line > > > support when releasing 2.5.x and 2.5.x-hadoop3, so the command for > > > bumping version is > > > > > > mvn versions:set-property -Dproperty=revision -DnewVersion=<newversion> > > > > > > I've been thinking of introducing a jenkins job for creating release > > > for a long time, but haven't gotten enough time to do it since it is > > > not easy for me as I'm not a jenkins expert... > > > > > > Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> 于2023年11月30日周四 10:45写道： > > >> > > >> It seems silly to do a review just for a change that modifies the > > project > > >> version. I mean, it's trivial to "mvn versions:set > > >> -DnewVersion=<newversion>", and surely RMs can be trusted to do this > and > > >> not mess it up. You might think the PR is fine, but it can introduce > > hours > > >> if not days of delay in the release process, which takes long enough > > >> already. Anyway glad we agree results produced by release tools don't > > >> require signoff. > > >> > > >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:13 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Just for checking there is no mistake :) > > >>> > > >>> And if we can formalize the cutting release branch related operations > > >>> in a release tool, I do not think we need the signoff, just running > > >>> the automatic tool is fine, but now it still requires manual > > >>> operations, so I think having a double check is better. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks. > > >>> > > >>> Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> 于2023年11月30日周四 02:45写道： > > >>>> > > >>>> I don't think RMs should need to get PR approvals for version > changes > > in > > >>>> the POMs. The create-release script normally does this automatically > > >>>> anyway. Sure, this is renumbering branch-2, not a release branch, > but > > who > > >>>> is going to object? > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:38 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Better to open an umbrella issue for tracking the task, and open a > > >>>>> sub-task for each step. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> For bumping version to 2.7.0-SNAPSHOT, still better to open an PR > as > > >>>>> it is a code commit. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Others are all good. Thanks Byran for taking care of this! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@apache.org> 于2023年11月29日周三 > 21:24写道： > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Here's my planned approach. Please let me know if this looks good: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> # Create new branch > > >>>>>> git checkout branch-2 > > >>>>>> git pull upstream branch-2 > > >>>>>> git status # check all is good > > >>>>>> git checkout -b branch-2.6 > > >>>>>> git push upstream branch-2.6 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> # Update snapshot version on branch-2 > > >>>>>> git checkout branch-2 > > >>>>>> Edit root pom.xml, change properties.revision to 2.7.0-SNAPSHOT > > >>>>>> git commit, "Renumber to 2.7.0-SNAPSHOT after branching > branch-2.6" > > >>> with > > >>>>>> self-sign-off > > >>>>>> git push upstream branch-2 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> After that I will start looking through JIRA for fixVersion 2.6.0 > > >>> issues, > > >>>>>> to make sure there's no inconsistencies. *Is there anything I need > > >>> to do > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>> set up nightly builds for the new branch? *We should probably let > > >>> nightly > > >>>>>> builds run for a few days before starting RC. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Prior to starting the RC process, I will try deploying the newly > > >>> minted > > >>>>>> 2.6-snapshot onto a test cluster in my environment. I notice that > > >>> Andrew > > >>>>>> did a bunch of load and chaos testing for the 2.5.0 release. I > will > > >>> try > > >>>>>> running these locally, but we have not ever run ITBLL, etc in my > > >>>>> company's > > >>>>>> environment so that might take some time to set up. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 8:50 AM Bryan Beaudreault < > > >>>>> bbeaudrea...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Sorry for the delay. I just sent a new thread to the list to > alert > > >>> to > > >>>>>>> creating branch-2.6 next week. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 3:35 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > >>> palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Bump again :) > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Are we ready to cut branch-2.6? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@apache.org> 于2023年10月26日周四 > > >>> 21:22写道： > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Just as an update here, I plan to do this but have been busy > > >>> with > > >>>>>>>> internal > > >>>>>>>>> work. I'll try to carve out time in the next 1-2 weeks. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 8:50 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > >>>>> palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Just send a notice to the dev mailing list, and then use the > > >>>>> normal > > >>>>>>>>>> git way to create a new branch called branch-2.6 from > > >>> branch-2, > > >>>>> push > > >>>>>>>>>> it to github, done :) > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@apache.org> 于2023年10月20日周五 > > >>>>> 07:53写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> I can give it a shot :) > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> I’ve started looking at the release docs, but don’t see any > > >>>>> info on > > >>>>>>>> how > > >>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> create a new release branch. Is there a process for that? > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 1:55 PM Andrew Purtell < > > >>>>> apurt...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I second this nomination! > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 6:39 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > >>>>>>>> palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, good. So we are good to go I think. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> And we need a release manager for 2.6.x, do you have any > > >>>>>>>> interest in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> being a release manager for 2.6.x? :) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@apache.org> > > >>> 于2023年10月19日周四 > > >>>>>>>> 21:22写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello. I'm not aware of any major blockers at the > > >>> moment. > > >>>>> In > > >>>>>>>> fact > > >>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> recently finished our migration and are fully using > > >>> 2.6's > > >>>>> TLS > > >>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>> all of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> our > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> production. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:07 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > >>>>>>>>>> palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Bryan, do we still have any blocker issues for > > >>>>> cutting > > >>>>>>>>>> branch-2.6 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and starting to release 2.6.0? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> 于2023年9月26日周二 > > >>>>> 01:02写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Duo. Following up on HBASE-28042. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 7:53 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> palomino...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some updates here. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The tcnative module is almost done, only some > > >>> small > > >>>>>>>> concerns > > >>>>>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> how to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deal with the license and notice files. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is still a blocker issue HBASE-28081, but > > >>>>> anyway > > >>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> already > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found the root cause is HBASE-28042, so I think > > >>> it > > >>>>> will > > >>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>> fixed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> soon. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All other issues have been resolved. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > >>> 于2023年9月22日周五 > > >>>>>>>> 02:21写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Both sound good, thanks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:46 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) > > >>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> palomino...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We'd better get a new thirdparty release > > >>> first, > > >>>>>>>> update > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2 to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the new thirdparty release, and then make > > >>> the > > >>>>> 2.6.0 > > >>>>>>>>>> release, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new netty release includes the improvements > > >>>>>>>> contributed > > >>>>>>>>>> by > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bryan. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/netty/netty/pull/13551 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current blocking issues are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HBASE-28075, where we want to shade netty > > >>>>> tcnative > > >>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>> well, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bryan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he already had a workable solution. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HBASE-22138, where we want to also > > >>> relocated the > > >>>>>>>> proto > > >>>>>>>>>> files > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shaded > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> protobuf, there is no technical problem now > > >>> and > > >>>>> I've > > >>>>>>>>>> opened a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> PR > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 4.1.5-SNAPSHOT version of > > >>> hbase-thirdparty, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5411. > > >>>>> There is > > >>>>>>>>>> another > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we used to exclude CanIgnoreReturnValue > > >>>>>>>> annotation > > >>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ignore > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error prone errors, but I think we should > > >>> add it > > >>>>>>>> back > > >>>>>>>>>> and fix > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error prone errors, instead of ignoring it, > > >>>>> should > > >>>>>>>> not be > > >>>>>>>>>>>> very > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hard to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the above issues have a clear path to > > >>>>> resolve, > > >>>>>>>> so I > > >>>>>>>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not delay too much. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>> 于2023年9月20日周三 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 02:51写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hate to keep delaying, but it might be > > >>> nice > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>>> wait > > >>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28065. > > >>>>>>>> It > > >>>>>>>>>> was > > >>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> big > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> long standing) bug for us, and given the > > >>>>> solution > > >>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>> ready > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ( > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5384) > > >>> we > > >>>>>>>> might as > > >>>>>>>>>>>> well > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> get > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next releases. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:37 PM Andrew > > >>>>> Purtell < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apurt...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Duo. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not need help. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been waiting to ensure more > > >>> should do > > >>>>>>>> items > > >>>>>>>>>> do not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appear. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we are good now? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 12:31 AM 张铎(Duo > > >>>>> Zhang) < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HBASE-28061 has been merged. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you need any help on the release > > >>>>> processing > > >>>>>>>>>> Andrew? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I could offer my help. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>> 于2023年9月14日周四 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 15:55写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you have not cut the RC yet, > > >>> please > > >>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>> include > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HBASE-28061 in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.5.6, as it could solve the > > >>> problem for > > >>>>>>>> running > > >>>>>>>>>> pre > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compiled > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.5.x > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tarball and also our published > > >>>>> artifacts in > > >>>>>>>> maven > > >>>>>>>>>>>> repo > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> against > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hadoop > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.3.x. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The hive community needs this as > > >>> they > > >>>>> want > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>> upgrade > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hbase and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hadoop > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org > > >>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 于2023年8月30日周三 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06:48写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am back from vacation. Slowly > > >>>>> clearing > > >>>>>>>> my > > >>>>>>>>>> inbox. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1,545 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unread, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a while. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems we are ready to cut > > >>>>> branch-2.6 > > >>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> stabilizing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6.0. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> volunteers to RM 2.6.0? Otherwise > > >>> I'm > > >>>>>>>> happy to > > >>>>>>>>>> do > > >>>>>>>>>>>> it, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> starting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probably 9/5 or 9/6. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some good changes have landed in > > >>>>>>>> branch-2.5. > > >>>>>>>>>> RC0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.5.6 by > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Friday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9/1. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic > > >>> imbeciles > > >>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been > > >>> counting > > >>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles > > >>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting > > >>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > >>>>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > >>>>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> Best regards, > > >>>> Andrew > > >>>> > > >>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > >>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > >>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Best regards, > > >> Andrew > > >> > > >> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > >> It's what we’ve earned > > >> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > >> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > > -- Best regards, Andrew Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - It's what we’ve earned Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
