Agree with Denis. Let's do the simple refactoring first, and then more complicated one in phase 2.
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 6:47 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Thus, my suggestion is: > > — find and update all hardcoded “fabric” usage on TC, so that they work > > both with or without fabric in name of binaries > > — use current implementation — review and merge to master > > — plan full suffix refactoring (as Anton suggests) on the next > iterations > > with no rush > > > I like this plan which allows us to do the things. I see the current > implementation as one of the steps of the overall refactoring proposed by > Anton. It sounds normal if we split refactoring into pieces. > > Anton, do you have time to help with the rest of refactoring tasks before > AI 2.7? It's great if we close the whole tasks by that time. Otherwise, > let's split it and release the current implementation first. > > -- > Denis > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:18 AM Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dmitriy, > > > > I cannot forecast estimates for this task as it dependents on many > factors: > > — I will be able to start researching the Anton’s implementation > > suggestion not earlier than the beginning of September > > — I am not acquainted with assembly configuration well, it may take some > > considerable time to understand how correctly get rid of “fabric” not > > touching everything else > > — the process of review and merge can also drag on indefinitely (based > on > > the previous attempt to introduce this changes) > > > > > > Vladimir, > > > > If community will approve this hack, I’ll implement it. > > Yet it won’t resolve the problem of building from sources not on TC — the > > fabric will stay in names of binaries and folders inside. > > And it will add problems when the correct implementation will be > > introduced. > > > > > > > > Thus, my suggestion is: > > — find and update all hardcoded “fabric” usage on TC, so that they work > > both with or without fabric in name of binaries > > — use current implementation — review and merge to master > > — plan full suffix refactoring (as Anton suggests) on the next > iterations > > with no rush > > > > > > > > > On 3 Aug 2018, at 09:50, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > Can you please explain the problem with TC and artifacts? Can we just > > > rename final artifact at the end of a build phase just before signing, > > and > > > leave the rest TC infrastructure as is? > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 12:28 AM Dmitriy Setrakyan < > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Anton, Petr, > > >> > > >> Thanks for your readiness to assist. Can this be done for 2.7 release? > > >> > > >> D. > > >> > > >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:32 AM, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> What I see is that we spent almost a year discussing how to do this. > > >>> I'm pretty sure we had enough time to do everything properly. > > >>> > > >>> So, proposal is to stop this discussion and start refactoring. > > >>> > > >>> I do not see any pitfalls and ready to assist if necessary. > > >>> > > >>> чт, 2 авг. 2018 г. в 5:14, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > >: > > >>> > > >>>> I vote to remove the fabric from the build in the easiest way > > possible. > > >>> Can > > >>>> other Igniters comment? > > >>>> > > >>>> D. > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> My concern here is exactly about internal build processes — > removing > > >>>>> fabric from the name of binary archive (with any way) will break > lots > > >>> of > > >>>>> them. > > >>>>> There will be no sacrifices, just lots of work for fixing build > > >>> processes > > >>>>> (where we won’t be able to introduce changes proactively). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Therefore only fabric removal implementation (quick with some > legacy > > >>> left > > >>>>> or full refactoring) is on the agenda. > > >>>>> And this matter should be jugged by the community: currently we > have > > >>> (if > > >>>>> our voices are equal) 1:1 with Anton about it. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> On 1 Aug 2018, at 22:28, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Let's focus on what is important here. Our users do not care about > > >>> our > > >>>>>> internal build process.If we could remove the word fabric from the > > >>> next > > >>>>>> release without any significant sacrifices in the build process or > > >>>> making > > >>>>>> it less maintainable, I suggest we do it. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> D. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Simple way with some hack and legacy maintenance: accept patch as > > >> it > > >>>> is > > >>>>>>> implemented now. > > >>>>>>> Hard way: full assembly refactoring and hadoop rejection. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Anyway, after this is merged to master — complete automation > > >> systems > > >>>>>>> revision (TeamCity for example) is required due to heavy hardcode > > >> of > > >>>>>>> “fabric” in such systems. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On 1 Aug 2018, at 21:55, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > >> dsetrak...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> OK, so what is the plan? How do we get rid of the fabric name? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> D. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:21 AM, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Since you proposing patch to the community, you are the very > man > > >>> :) > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> ср, 1 авг. 2018 г. в 12:16, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> You are convincing the wrong person. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Aug 2018, at 12:05, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Peter, > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> We had a discussion about how to do this properly. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Proposed solution cannot be merged, since it makes code > harder > > >>>> than > > >>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>> was. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> The only case is to perform complete refactoring and get rid > > >> of > > >>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>> postfixes and other weird stuff. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> For example > > >>>>>>>>>>> - <ignite.zip.pattern> > > >>>>>>>>>>> - <ignite.edition> > > >>>>>>>>>>> should be definetely removed from code. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> ср, 1 авг. 2018 г. в 9:39, Peter Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com > > >>> : > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> The task was ready long ago, but community failed to review > > >> and > > >>>>> merge > > >>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Not being a committer, my capabilities of introducing such > > >>>> changes > > >>>>>>> are > > >>>>>>>>>>>> limited. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I will update code during this week and will pass for review > > >>> once > > >>>>>>>>> again. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 at 00:24, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > >>>>>>> dsetrak...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, agree, fabric has to be removed. If it is done in 2.7, > > >>>> would > > >>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>> great! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Denis Magda < > > >>> dma...@apache.org > > >>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Peter, folks, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's weird, but we have been failing to introduce this > > >> minor > > >>>>> change > > >>>>>>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> December. Can we get it done for 2.7 that is being > > >> discussed > > >>> at > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> moment? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are there any technical issues that block you from merging > > >>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> changes? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 10:03 PM Peter Ivanov < > > >>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, then I will update issue code and start preparation > > >> for > > >>>>> build > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration changes. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 at 23:41, Denis Magda < > > >> dma...@apache.org > > >>>> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With which one — current implementation in issue? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's the answer to your question: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. quickly fix all of them (can be solved by preliminary > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> preparations — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> searching for -fabric- usages in build configuration); > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. update all branches to master because otherwise old > > >>>> branch > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stop > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Petr Ivanov < > > >>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7 Jun 2018, at 23:04, Denis Magda < > > >> dma...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm fine with the suggested approach. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With which one — current implementation in issue? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, not sure we need to update > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the branches. Can't branch owners just pull the > > >>> changes > > >>>>>>>>>>>> back > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> master if the plan to merge back later? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, we as an initiative group of this issue > > >> should > > >>> do > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will lie on shoulders of developers. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Petr Ivanov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The most simple approach — repack and rearchive > binary > > >>>>> archive > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> after > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release build, however that would not resolve the > > >>> problem > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> globally > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will require fixing every build configuration we have > > >> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> TeamCity). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Current approach implemented in task — creates > already > > >>>>> correct > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> folder > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> binary archive name, but old name (with -fabric-) is > > >>> used > > >>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build configuration too and merge code to master will > > >>>>> require > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. quickly fix all of them (can be solved by > > >> preliminary > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preparations > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — searching for -fabric- usages in build > > >> configuration); > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. update all branches to master because otherwise > old > > >>>>>>>>>>>> branch > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stop building. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7 Jun 2018, at 22:42, Denis Magda < > > >>> dma...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for pulling up the conversation. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still prefer us not to complicate the things and > > >> just > > >>>>>>>>>>>> remove > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "fabric" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the *package name*. Use the easiest way > > >> possible. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I don't care about Hadoop and would not > > >>>> suggest > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasting its time on it. So, just rename the > > >>>>> suffixes/prefixes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> files the way you like to address Anton's concerns. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Petr Ivanov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lets define once again what should be done in this > > >> [1] > > >>>>> task? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If current implementation is good, than I’ll update > > >> it > > >>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> master > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pass > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for review. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet, there is other part of the task which concerns > > >>> our > > >>>>>>>>>>>> build > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assume that almost all our build configurations > will > > >>>> fail > > >>>>>>>>>>>> due > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change and there is no simple way of updating > > >>>>> configurations > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merge task to master and start fixing failing > > >> builds. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7251 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10 Feb 2018, at 01:56, Denis Magda < > > >>>> dma...@apache.org > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think we necessarily need to remove > > >> 'fabric' > > >>>>> word > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the project, we just need to rename the name > of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> downloadable > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Couldn’t say it better than you, Val. Thanks for > > >>>> pitching > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> :) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly what the ticket is about. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2018, at 11:53 AM, Valentin Kulichenko > < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think we necessarily need to remove > > >> 'fabric' > > >>>>> word > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the project, we just need to rename the name > of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> downloadable > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package. Is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there any other place where 'fabric' is exposed > to > > >>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> user? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If that's the case, it should not be a big > change, > > >>> no? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:49 AM, Anton Vinogradov > < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> avinogra...@gridgain.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're proposing changes without viewing a code > > >> :) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:07 PM, Denis Magda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dma...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What’s wrong if we just go ahead and: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - replace “fabric” with “ignite” > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - replace “hadoop” with “ignite-hadoop" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 8, 2018, at 1:51 AM, Anton Vinogradov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> avinogra...@gridgain.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "hadoop" and "fabric" words work on same > > >> engine. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have special assembly desctiptors, for > > >>> example: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies-fabric.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies-fabric-lgpl.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies-hadoop.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-base.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-fabric.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-fabric-base.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-fabric-lgpl.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-hadoop.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, I'ts impossible for now to remove "fabric" > > >>>>> without > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "hadoop" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only one case is to make some ditry hack, but > > >>>> that's > > >>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Sergey Kozlov > > >> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skoz...@gridgain.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 hadoop accelerator removing for AI 2.5 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also probably IGFS should be either removed > or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> refactored, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e.g. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FS > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directly over the data region without using > > >>>> "cache" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> entity > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intermidiate stage > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:13 AM, Denis Magda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dma...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don’t get how the hadoop editions are > > >> related > > >>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> task. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not named as “data fabric” for a while. > > >>> Check > > >>>> up > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> site > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> docs. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The “fabric” word is being removed from all > > >>> over > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> places > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed from the editions’ names. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for the hadoop future, my personal > > >> position > > >>> is > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> retire > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> component > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and forget about it. I would restart the > > >>>>> conversation > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> again > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with 2.4. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 7, 2018, at 2:13 AM, Anton > > >> Vinogradov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis, Petr, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I checked PR and found we have > > >>> *overcomplicated* > > >>>>>>>>>>>> logic > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "fabric" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "hadoop" postfixs. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we really need to assembly 2 editions? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Hadoop" edition still valued? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My proposal is to get rid of "hadoop" > > >> edition > > >>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> replace > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction of how to use "fabric" edition > > >>>>> instead. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Instruction will be pretty easy -> move > > >>> "hadoop" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> folder > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "optional" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> root directory :) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In that case we can just remove all postfix > > >>>> logic > > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maven > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> poms > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simplify release process. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Denis > > >> Magda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dma...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr, thanks for solving it! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hope that Anton V. or some other build > > >> master > > >>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> double-check > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes and merge them. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 28, 2017, at 8:29 AM, Petr > Ivanov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-7251 is done, needs review and > some > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> additional > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PR > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #3315 [1]. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3315 > > >>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/ > ignite/pull/3315 > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Dec 2017, at 23:15, Denis Magda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dma...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr, thanks, such a swift turnaround! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have you found the one who can asses > and > > >>>> review > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maintainers label might be helpful. > Just > > >>> ping > > >>>>>>>>>>>> them > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directly: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to+Contribute#HowtoContribute- > ReviewProcessandMaintainers > > >> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> confluence/display/IGNITE/How+ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to+Contribute#HowtoContribute- > ReviewProcessandMaintainers> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 20, 2017, at 12:24 AM, Petr > > >> Ivanov > > >>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assigned myself — done the same work > > >> while > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> preparing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RPM > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But for fixing DEVNOTES.txt waiting > for > > >>>> review > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merge > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-7107 [1]. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-7107 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Dec 2017, at 22:55, Denis > Magda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dma...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the bids were accepted and the > > >>> verdict > > >>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> executed: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7251 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/ > > >>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-7251> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who is ready to pick this up? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 19, 2017, at 5:35 AM, Anton > > >>>>> Vinogradov > > >>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> avinogra...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1б фо шур > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:59 AM, > > >>> Vladimir > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ozerov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voze...@gridgain.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1б вуаштшеудн > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:34 AM, > > >>> Valentin > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kulichenko > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:24 PM, > > >>>> Dmitriy > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Setrakyan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dsetrak...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (completely agree) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 10:21 AM, > > >>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Magda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dma...@apache.org> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Ignite binary releases > > >> still > > >>>>>>>>>>>> include > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “fabric” > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> word > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> names: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://ignite.apache.org/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> download.cgi#binaries > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://ignite.apache.org/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> download.cgi#binaries > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For instance, this is a full > name > > >>> of > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> previous > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache-ignite-fabric-2.3.0-bin. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It’s a little oversight on our > > >> side > > >>>>>>>>>>>> because > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positioned as a fabric for a > > >> while. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Proposal! Remove “fabric” from > the > > >>>> name > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> binary > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> named > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as - > apache-ignite-{version}-bin. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we’re in consensus then let’s > > >>> make > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> change > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.4. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> — > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergey Kozlov > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridGain Systems > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.gridgain.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
