I think people are misunderstanding part of the reason for the <version> within 
a pom.xml file. Yes, that version is used to version the artifact, but it is 
also used to uniquely identify the pom.xml file. Suppose I change my pom.xml 
(ex. add a new dependency); if my <version> is defined by a variable, it won't 
change when my pom.xml file changes, then how do I know which version of the 
pom.xml had, or didn't have, that extra dependency?

I believe this is why Maven gives the message: [WARNING] 'version' contains an 
expression but should be a constant.

I live by the rule that if anything in my pom.xml file changes, I must bump the 
version. Yes that's a pain especially if it is a parent pom.xml (because then 
it ripples down into all children and grandchildren), but that's the price to 
pay for guaranteeing that I know exactly how I produced my artifacts.

Regards,
Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: Mehul Sanghvi [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 8:03 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: variable doesn't work for version

I am guessing that is what is happening in my case.

We have a multi-module project, and so the root POM has the following for the 
project:

<project ..... >

      <groupId>com.mehul</groupId>
      <artifactId>super-project</artifactId>
      <packaging>pom</packaging>
      <versioning>${revision}</version>

      ....
</project>

In sub-module-A/pom.xml:

<project ....>

      <parent>
            <groupId>com.mehul</groupId>
            <artifactId>super-project</artifactId>
            <version>${revision}</version>
      </parent>

      <groupId>com.mehul</groupId>
      <artifactId>sub-module-A</artifactId>
      ....

</project>


In sub-module-A/sub-AA/pom.xml

<project ....>

      <parent>
            <groupId>com.mehul</groupId>
            <artifactId>sub-module-A</artifactId>
            <version>${revision}</version>
      </parent>

      <groupId>com.mehul</groupId>
      <artifactId>sub-AA-maven-plugin</artifactId>
      <packaging>maven-plugin</packaging>
      ....

</project>

sub-AA-maven-plugin is required before the project can be built, so I do the 
following steps in order to get the over-all project built:

     bash% cd sub-module-A

     bash% mvn -Drevision=1.2.3.4.5-SNAPSHOT -B -V clean install

     bash% cd ..

     bash% mvn -Drevision=1.2.3.4.5-SNAPSHOT -B -V clean install


Everything gets built, but when I look at the 
~/.m2/repository/com/mehul/sub-module-A/1.2.3.4.5-SNAPSHOT/sub-module-A-1.2.3.4.5-SNAPSHOT.pom
file, the version is not substituted with 1.2.3.4.5-SNAPSHOT, but rather still 
has the ${revision} property, verbatim.

Is this expected behaviour or is this a bug?  Is this what is being talked 
about when saying

       this doesn't fully include logic to ensure that the
       substitution resolved pom is installed/deployed, so may cause issues for
       out-of-reactor consumption as a dependency


I do get dependency related  issues when trying to use sub-AA-maven-plugin in 
the build process.  The failure is of the following type:

      No plugin found for prefix 'sub-AA' in the current project and in the 
plugin groups ...

If I use an explicit version number in the POM files, everything works just 
fine.  Also if I use plugin with full GAV resolution from the command line:

        mvn  com.mehul:sub-AA-maven-plugin:1.2.3.4.5-SNAPSHOT:do-fubar

it works just fine.  Normally I would use the plug-in using the following:


         mvn sub-AA:do-fubar


and nothing more.

Apologies if this is not related to the issue at hand.  I was reading through 
this thread and it seemed what was being talked about was similar to my issue.


cheers,

      mehul


On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 3:04 AM, Stephen Connolly < 
[email protected]> wrote:

> Also I suspect this doesn't fully include logic to ensure that the 
> substitution resolved pom is installed/deployed, so may cause issues 
> for out-of-reactor consumption as a dependency, or GPG signature 
> validation if you try to "fix" with a hack
>
> On Thursday 10 March 2016, Stephen Connolly < 
> [email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > It's ${revision} or ${changelist} or a third one I cannot recall, 
> > ${rev} is on the "moan and wail" list
> >
> > On Wednesday 9 March 2016, Benson Margulies <[email protected] 
> > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
> >
> >> Almost really working. The only gripe is that it is still warning 
> >> me that I have an expression in <version/>, even when I use 'rev' 
> >> as cited. Is that poor choice?
> >>
> >> [INFO] rev 0.0.1.20160309172035
> >> [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> >> [WARNING]
> >> [WARNING] Some problems were encountered while building the 
> >> effective model for
> >> com.basistech:auto-version-maven-extension-test:jar:0.0.1.201603091
> >> 72035 [WARNING] 'version' contains an expression but should be a 
> >> constant. @ com.basistech:auto-version-maven-extension-test:${rev},
> >> /Users/benson/x/auto-version-maven-extension/src/it/basic/pom.xml,
> >> line 7, column 14
> >> [WARNING]
> >> [WARNING] It is highly recommended to fix these problems because 
> >> they threaten the stability of your build.
> >> [WARNING]
> >> [WARNING] For this reason, future Maven versions might no longer 
> >> support building such malformed projects.
> >> [WARNING]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Benson Margulies 
> >> <[email protected]
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Of course, as soon as I hit Send I found out what I screwed up.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Benson Margulies <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> I tried this and it didn't work, even a little.
> >> >>
> >> >> See https://github.com/benson-basis/auto-version-maven-extension.
> >> >>
> >> >> My extension is never called, whether I put it into .mvn or the 
> >> >> maven home lib/ext directory. (Proved by running mvnDebug, 
> >> >> setting a breakpoint, and attaching a debugger).
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Benson Margulies <
> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Stephen Connolly 
> >> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>>> On Wednesday, 9 March 2016, Benson Margulies <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Tamás Cservenák <
> >> [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> > I assume it should be this (instead of spy):
> >> >>>>> >
> >> http://maven.apache.org/examples/maven-3-lifecycle-extensions.html
> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>>>> > And instead of starting beer machine, it can inject the 
> >> >>>>> > value
> >> into the
> >> >>>>> > session that you got from whenever...
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I don't think this can work as a thing configured in the POM.
> Unless
> >> >>>>> these items can be dropped into the ext directory instead of 
> >> >>>>> configured in the the pom as an extension. Is that the case 
> >> >>>>> in
> >> general
> >> >>>>> that the ext dir is the same thing as declaring in the POM as 
> >> >>>>> an extension?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> That's where the .mvn folder as an extension loading mechanism
> kicks
> >> in
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What version did that show up in? Prior, it has to be in a dir 
> >> >>> in
> the
> >> >>> maven home, right?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>>>> > maven related changes merely laxed the validation to allow 
> >> >>>>> > those
> >> three
> >> >>>>> > expressions in version, but does not provide anything as
> "source"
> >> for
> >> >>>>> those.
> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>>>> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:44 PM Stephen Connolly < 
> >> >>>>> > [email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>>>> >> I have no clue... that is a different question we should 
> >> >>>>> >> ask of
> >> the
> >> >>>>> person
> >> >>>>> >> who implemented this functionality
> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>>>> >> On 9 March 2016 at 13:40, Benson Margulies <
> >> [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>>>> >> > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Stephen Connolly 
> >> >>>>> >> > <[email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > > In the .mvn folder put an extension that contributes 
> >> >>>>> >> > > the
> >> ${rev}
> >> >>>>> >> property
> >> >>>>> >> > > based on whatever you seem safe
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > Stephen, can you please offer some details? Just what 
> >> >>>>> >> > sort of extension? An event spy that sees session start? 
> >> >>>>> >> > Something
> >> else? Does
> >> >>>>> >> > this require 3.3.x  or does it work with 3.2.5?
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > > Then just have the project version include the ${rev} 
> >> >>>>> >> > > at
> the
> >> >>>>> >> appropriate
> >> >>>>> >> > > place
> >> >>>>> >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > > On Tuesday 8 March 2016, Gary Gregory <
> >> [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:53 PM, Eric B <
> [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > <javascript:;>>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > The first question I have to ask is what you are 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > trying
> to
> >> >>>>> >> accomplish
> >> >>>>> >> > >> with
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > your continuous-delivery?
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> We have a Maven multi-module build which has 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> thousands of
> >> unit
> >> >>>>> tests.
> >> >>>>> >> We
> >> >>>>> >> > >> use Bamboo for CI and if we get a green build that 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> means
> >> that all
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>> >> > tests
> >> >>>>> >> > >> pass of course and that we successfully deployed the 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> build
> >> to our
> >> >>>>> repo
> >> >>>>> >> > (we
> >> >>>>> >> > >> use Artifactory). We use the Maven's deploy to 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> deploy, not
> >> the
> >> >>>>> release
> >> >>>>> >> > >> plugin.
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> At this point anyone can use the built product out of
> >> Bamboo's
> >> >>>>> saved
> >> >>>>> >> > >> artifacts or Artifactory: our internal/external
> >> consultants, sales
> >> >>>>> >> > >> engineers, formal QA, other downstream, products, and 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> so
> >> on. It's
> >> >>>>> up
> >> >>>>> >> to
> >> >>>>> >> > the
> >> >>>>> >> > >> PO to decide when to slap a new major or minor 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> version
> >> label and
> >> >>>>> >> he/she
> >> >>>>> >> > can
> >> >>>>> >> > >> do at anytime.
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> From development's POV, a green build is a released
> >> product, with a
> >> >>>>> >> > version
> >> >>>>> >> > >> for example 3.1.201601070101 (3.1.YYYYMMDDHHMM). We 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> used
> to
> >> have
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>> >> SVN
> >> >>>>> >> > >> version number as the maintenance version part but we 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> are
> >> >>>>> switching to
> >> >>>>> >> > Git
> >> >>>>> >> > >> soon, hence the move to timestamps.
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Our parent POM contains what is considered a Maven "hack":
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>   <properties>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>>
> >>
> <maven.build.timestamp.format>yyyyMMddHHmm</maven.build.timestamp.form
> at>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>     <version.major>3</version.major>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>     <version.minor>1</version.minor>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >>  <version.main>${version.major}.${version.minor}</version.main>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>     <revision>${maven.build.timestamp}</revision>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>     
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <dv.version>${version.main}.${revision}</dv.version>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Each module then has:
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <version>${dv.version}</version>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> What is the Maven way to achieve this goal?
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Gary
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > Are you trying to put snapshot versions into a 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > production/release state?
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > The biggest issue I have noticed with teams is the
> >> >>>>> misunderstanding
> >> >>>>> >> of
> >> >>>>> >> > >> how
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > SNAPSHOTs work, or their purpose in the development
> >> process.
> >> >>>>> Either
> >> >>>>> >> > >> teams
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > want to release applications in SNAPSHOT mode, or
> release
> >> code
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>> >> is
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > essentially in SNAPSHOT (ie: development) mode, but 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > with
> >> fixed
> >> >>>>> >> version
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > numbers.  But instead of changing version numbers, 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > they
> >> use
> >> >>>>> >> something
> >> >>>>> >> > >> like
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > a timestamp to increment version numbers automatically.
> >> But at
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>> >> > end
> >> >>>>> >> > >> of
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > it all, it kind of contravenes maven's versioning
> concept.
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > Normally, if your artifact is a work in progress, 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > you
> >> should
> >> >>>>> just be
> >> >>>>> >> > >> using
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > a SNAPSHOT.  If you are looking to make a real 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > release,
> >> then you
> >> >>>>> >> > should
> >> >>>>> >> > >> be
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > promoting your code from a SNAPSHOT to a fixed version.
> >> >>>>> Generally,
> >> >>>>> >> > the
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > concept of continuous-delivery should only apply 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > when
> in a
> >> >>>>> SNAPSHOT
> >> >>>>> >> > mode,
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > since anything else isn't changing (ie: a fixed 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > release
> >> doesn't
> >> >>>>> need
> >> >>>>> >> > to
> >> >>>>> >> > >> be
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > re-delivered).
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > So then that begs the question why you need to
> constantly
> >> change
> >> >>>>> >> your
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > version numbers during your development phase?
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > And if the goal is truly to have fixed versions for 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > some
> >> other
> >> >>>>> team
> >> >>>>> >> to
> >> >>>>> >> > >> have
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > access to a "stable" version of your artifact (ie: 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > they
> >> can be
> >> >>>>> >> > guaranteed
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > that it isn't going to change as you continue to
> >> develop), you
> >> >>>>> could
> >> >>>>> >> > >> always
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > use something like the maven-release-plugin to 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > promote
> >> from
> >> >>>>> SNAPSHOT
> >> >>>>> >> > to a
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > fixed version, and then re-open the next version as 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > a
> >> SNAPSHOT.
> >> >>>>> >> > >> (Although
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > I know there are many dissenters against the
> >> release-plugin).
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > Thanks,
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > Eric
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Gary Gregory <
> >> >>>>> >> [email protected] <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Is there a Maven-way to do continuous delivery then?
> As
> >> opposed
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > to continuous integration.
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Our current hack is to use the date as the 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > maintenance
> >> version
> >> >>>>> as
> >> >>>>> >> a
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > variable for example 3.1.20160102
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > G
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Eric B <
> >> [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > I personally have a pet-peeve of using system
> >> variables to
> >> >>>>> >> define
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > version
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > numbers; I find it is counter productive to the
> >> building of
> >> >>>>> >> maven
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > artifacts.  There is no traceability to 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > determine
> >> the actual
> >> >>>>> >> > version
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > of
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > an
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > artifact once it has been built.  At least 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > having a
> >> fixed
> >> >>>>> >> version
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > number
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > in
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > the <version> element shows up in the
> >> META-INF/maven/../pom.*
> >> >>>>> >> > files.
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > Is using a variable for the version even a good
> idea?
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > Thanks,
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > Eric
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Stephen 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > Connolly < [email protected] 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > only specific properties are permitted for
> >> expansion in
> >> >>>>> XPath
> >> >>>>> >> > paths
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > that
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > match the following regex
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > /project/(parent/)?(groupId|artifactId|version)
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > On 2 March 2016 at 05:39, Raghu <
> >> [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> .invalid
> >> >>>>> >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > wrote:
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > I have a POM with parent node as below: 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > <parent> <groupId>com.test</groupId>
> >> >>>>> >> > <artifactId>pom.parent</artifactId>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > <version>${test.version}</version>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > <relativePath>../scripts/pom.xml</relativeP
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > ath>
> >> </parent>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > This used to work till maven 3.3.3 version 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > - mvn
> >> clean
> >> >>>>> >> > install.
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > However,
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > the version 3.3.9 throws error though. When 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > I
> >> change the
> >> >>>>> >> > version
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > to a
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > value
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > instead of the variable, it works fine.
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > Won't maven support variable for version? 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > Or is
> >> it a bug
> >> >>>>> >> with
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > 3.3.9?
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > Appreciate your response...
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > > > - regards,raghu
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > --
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > E-Mail: [email protected] <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:;> |
> >> >>>>> >> [email protected] <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Second Edition <
> >> >>>>> http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Spring Batch in Action <
> >> http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > > http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >> >>>>> >> > >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >> >
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> --
> >> >>>>> >> > >> E-Mail: [email protected] <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:;> |
> >> >>>>> [email protected] <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Second Edition <
> >> http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Spring Batch in Action 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> >> >>>>> >> > >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! 
> >> >>>>> >> > >> http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >> >>>>> >> > >>
> >> >>>>> >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > >
> >> >>>>> >> > > --
> >> >>>>> >> > > Sent from my phone
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> --
> >> >>>>> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> >> >>>>> >> > [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> >> >>>>> >> > [email protected]
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>> >> >
> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> --
> >> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
> >> >>>>> <javascript:;>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Sent from my phone
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my phone
> >
>
>
> --
> Sent from my phone
>



--
Mehul N. Sanghvi
email: [email protected]

Reply via email to