Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Zameer Manji

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96377
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Zameer Manji


On Aug. 25, 2015, 8:01 a.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 8:01 a.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Maxim Khutornenko

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96362
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Maxim Khutornenko


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Joshua Cohen

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
---

Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.


Bugs: AURORA-1331
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331


Repository: aurora


Description
---

Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.


Diffs
-

  src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/


Testing
---

See screenshot.


File Attachments


Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
  
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png


Thanks,

Joshua Cohen



Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Aurora ReviewBot

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96399
---


Master (86a547b) is green with this patch.
  ./build-support/jenkins/build.sh

However, it appears that it might lack test coverage.

I will refresh this build result if you post a review containing @ReviewBot 
retry

- Aurora ReviewBot


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread David McLaughlin

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96394
---


What if they click on an old update and the instance page doesn't reflect the 
change made in this instance event? Do we care?

- David McLaughlin


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Joshua Cohen


 On Aug. 25, 2015, 6:42 p.m., David McLaughlin wrote:
  What if they click on an old update and the instance page doesn't reflect 
  the change made in this instance event? Do we care?

I don't think we care, there's not much we can do in that case, is there? The 
only thing I can think of is disabling links for completed updates, but that 
seems overly broad (some completed updates will link to instances that still 
exist).


- Joshua


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96394
---


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Joshua Cohen


 On Aug. 25, 2015, 6:42 p.m., David McLaughlin wrote:
  What if they click on an old update and the instance page doesn't reflect 
  the change made in this instance event? Do we care?
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 I don't think we care, there's not much we can do in that case, is there? 
 The only thing I can think of is disabling links for completed updates, but 
 that seems overly broad (some completed updates will link to instances that 
 still exist).
 
 David McLaughlin wrote:
 Right. I'm just concerned people click on the link to see what happened 
 on that instance event. I know it's what I would expect, given it's the only 
 link and the first column on the row too. 
 
 Basically it comes down - the instance page you added is a 'live' view of 
 that instance. It is potentially misleading to include that link on a table 
 that deals exclusively with historical data.

Yeah, I understand that, I'm just not sure what the alternative is other than 
not linking at all (which seems worse to me)? As far as I can see there's no 
association between an instance in an update and an actual task id (which would 
let us query to see if the scheduler still has a record of that task existing 
before displaying the link). That said, even if we *could* conditionally 
display the link, that might be even more confusing as it would be feasible 
that only *some* tasks from a historical update have been purged, while others 
might still remain, leading to a strange inconsistency on the update page where 
only some instances are links, while others are not.

As far as I see it we have three options:

1) Always link to the instance page.
2) Only link to the instance page for active updates.
3) Never link to the instance page.

Option 1 seems like the best option in that it provides an easy way to see what 
happened for an update, and in most likely cases (debugging an active or 
recently completed update) should provide useful data (though admittedly could 
prove to be confusing in the cases where the task that was part of an update 
has already been pruned).


- Joshua


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96394
---


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Maxim Khutornenko


 On Aug. 25, 2015, 6:42 p.m., David McLaughlin wrote:
  What if they click on an old update and the instance page doesn't reflect 
  the change made in this instance event? Do we care?
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 I don't think we care, there's not much we can do in that case, is there? 
 The only thing I can think of is disabling links for completed updates, but 
 that seems overly broad (some completed updates will link to instances that 
 still exist).
 
 David McLaughlin wrote:
 Right. I'm just concerned people click on the link to see what happened 
 on that instance event. I know it's what I would expect, given it's the only 
 link and the first column on the row too. 
 
 Basically it comes down - the instance page you added is a 'live' view of 
 that instance. It is potentially misleading to include that link on a table 
 that deals exclusively with historical data.
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 Yeah, I understand that, I'm just not sure what the alternative is other 
 than not linking at all (which seems worse to me)? As far as I can see 
 there's no association between an instance in an update and an actual task id 
 (which would let us query to see if the scheduler still has a record of that 
 task existing before displaying the link). That said, even if we *could* 
 conditionally display the link, that might be even more confusing as it would 
 be feasible that only *some* tasks from a historical update have been purged, 
 while others might still remain, leading to a strange inconsistency on the 
 update page where only some instances are links, while others are not.
 
 As far as I see it we have three options:
 
 1) Always link to the instance page.
 2) Only link to the instance page for active updates.
 3) Never link to the instance page.
 
 Option 1 seems like the best option in that it provides an easy way to 
 see what happened for an update, and in most likely cases (debugging an 
 active or recently completed update) should provide useful data (though 
 admittedly could prove to be confusing in the cases where the task that was 
 part of an update has already been pruned).
 
 David McLaughlin wrote:
 I'm leaning towards (3) but maybe that's because I don't understand where 
 the requirement comes from. The linked ticket suggests the user story is I 
 see an instance event with a 'bad' event status and I want to click straight 
 through to see why.' I see the main use case for this occuring when you have 
 a bad deploy, but if rollbacks are enabled you'd click the event and get 
 taken to the rolled back instance page. This could be frustrating at best and 
 misleading/confusing at worst.
 
 Happy to be overruled by a tie-breaking vote here.

| but if rollbacks are enabled you'd click the event and get taken to the 
rolled back instance page.

The instance page aggregates task history by instance ID, right? This is a 
perfect example when having instance history is actually quite useful when 
debugging a rollback.


- Maxim


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96394
---


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread David McLaughlin


 On Aug. 25, 2015, 6:42 p.m., David McLaughlin wrote:
  What if they click on an old update and the instance page doesn't reflect 
  the change made in this instance event? Do we care?
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 I don't think we care, there's not much we can do in that case, is there? 
 The only thing I can think of is disabling links for completed updates, but 
 that seems overly broad (some completed updates will link to instances that 
 still exist).
 
 David McLaughlin wrote:
 Right. I'm just concerned people click on the link to see what happened 
 on that instance event. I know it's what I would expect, given it's the only 
 link and the first column on the row too. 
 
 Basically it comes down - the instance page you added is a 'live' view of 
 that instance. It is potentially misleading to include that link on a table 
 that deals exclusively with historical data.
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 Yeah, I understand that, I'm just not sure what the alternative is other 
 than not linking at all (which seems worse to me)? As far as I can see 
 there's no association between an instance in an update and an actual task id 
 (which would let us query to see if the scheduler still has a record of that 
 task existing before displaying the link). That said, even if we *could* 
 conditionally display the link, that might be even more confusing as it would 
 be feasible that only *some* tasks from a historical update have been purged, 
 while others might still remain, leading to a strange inconsistency on the 
 update page where only some instances are links, while others are not.
 
 As far as I see it we have three options:
 
 1) Always link to the instance page.
 2) Only link to the instance page for active updates.
 3) Never link to the instance page.
 
 Option 1 seems like the best option in that it provides an easy way to 
 see what happened for an update, and in most likely cases (debugging an 
 active or recently completed update) should provide useful data (though 
 admittedly could prove to be confusing in the cases where the task that was 
 part of an update has already been pruned).

I'm leaning towards (3) but maybe that's because I don't understand where the 
requirement comes from. The linked ticket suggests the user story is I see an 
instance event with a 'bad' event status and I want to click straight through 
to see why.' I see the main use case for this occuring when you have a bad 
deploy, but if rollbacks are enabled you'd click the event and get taken to the 
rolled back instance page. This could be frustrating at best and 
misleading/confusing at worst.

Happy to be overruled by a tie-breaking vote here.


- David


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96394
---


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread Joshua Cohen


 On Aug. 25, 2015, 6:42 p.m., David McLaughlin wrote:
  What if they click on an old update and the instance page doesn't reflect 
  the change made in this instance event? Do we care?
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 I don't think we care, there's not much we can do in that case, is there? 
 The only thing I can think of is disabling links for completed updates, but 
 that seems overly broad (some completed updates will link to instances that 
 still exist).
 
 David McLaughlin wrote:
 Right. I'm just concerned people click on the link to see what happened 
 on that instance event. I know it's what I would expect, given it's the only 
 link and the first column on the row too. 
 
 Basically it comes down - the instance page you added is a 'live' view of 
 that instance. It is potentially misleading to include that link on a table 
 that deals exclusively with historical data.
 
 Joshua Cohen wrote:
 Yeah, I understand that, I'm just not sure what the alternative is other 
 than not linking at all (which seems worse to me)? As far as I can see 
 there's no association between an instance in an update and an actual task id 
 (which would let us query to see if the scheduler still has a record of that 
 task existing before displaying the link). That said, even if we *could* 
 conditionally display the link, that might be even more confusing as it would 
 be feasible that only *some* tasks from a historical update have been purged, 
 while others might still remain, leading to a strange inconsistency on the 
 update page where only some instances are links, while others are not.
 
 As far as I see it we have three options:
 
 1) Always link to the instance page.
 2) Only link to the instance page for active updates.
 3) Never link to the instance page.
 
 Option 1 seems like the best option in that it provides an easy way to 
 see what happened for an update, and in most likely cases (debugging an 
 active or recently completed update) should provide useful data (though 
 admittedly could prove to be confusing in the cases where the task that was 
 part of an update has already been pruned).
 
 David McLaughlin wrote:
 I'm leaning towards (3) but maybe that's because I don't understand where 
 the requirement comes from. The linked ticket suggests the user story is I 
 see an instance event with a 'bad' event status and I want to click straight 
 through to see why.' I see the main use case for this occuring when you have 
 a bad deploy, but if rollbacks are enabled you'd click the event and get 
 taken to the rolled back instance page. This could be frustrating at best and 
 misleading/confusing at worst.
 
 Happy to be overruled by a tie-breaking vote here.
 
 Maxim Khutornenko wrote:
 | but if rollbacks are enabled you'd click the event and get taken to the 
 rolled back instance page.
 
 The instance page aggregates task history by instance ID, right? This is 
 a perfect example when having instance history is actually quite useful when 
 debugging a rollback.

Exactly. There's no rolled back instance page. There's just the instance page 
that shows you everything that's happened recently for a particular instance 
id. So based on your example of a rollback, you'd see the Active task as the 
rolled back one, and under the list of completed tasks, you'd see the one that 
failed and (hopefully) more easily be able to determine what went wrong.


- Joshua


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96394
---


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen
 




Re: Review Request 37761: Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.

2015-08-25 Thread David McLaughlin

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/#review96479
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- David McLaughlin


On Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/
 ---
 
 (Updated Aug. 25, 2015, 3:01 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for Aurora, David McLaughlin and Zameer Manji.
 
 
 Bugs: AURORA-1331
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1331
 
 
 Repository: aurora
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add a link to the instance page from instance events on the update page.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   src/main/resources/scheduler/assets/update.html 
 3750aab342e326fc34d254dbfce791da0ca05ec6 
 
 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37761/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 See screenshot.
 
 
 File Attachments
 
 
 Look, the instance numbers are blue, because they're links!
   
 https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2015/08/25/b0dc6715-be1a-4a81-992f-caf2efd847a6__Screen_Shot_2015-08-25_at_9.59.50_AM.png
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Joshua Cohen