[GUIDANCE NEEDED] Promotion to Incubator

[Bernd Fondermann]

Fellow researchers,

Today, I'd like to ask you for advice. The basic question is what is it
that a labling must do to become an promotion candidate? ('promoted' is
on of the four states a lab can have, see [1])

I already know about Champions, Mentors, Proposal and all Incubator
related stuff. These are obviously entry criteria for going _into_
incubation.
Are theses also exit criteria on the lab's side? Would it be that a lab
is promoted first and then starts its formal incubation process? Or
would the lab go through all the incubation preparation and then ask for
promotion?

Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?

Thanks,

   Bernd

[1] http://labs.apache.org/faq.html#q7

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Roland Weber]

Hi Bernd,

> Would it be that a lab
> is promoted first and then starts its formal incubation process? Or
> would the lab go through all the incubation preparation and then ask for
> promotion?

The FAQ says:
 > Promoted - The lab started incubation.

Note the past tense. The way I read it, the lab changes
its state automatically by starting incubation, whatever
that means. Probably by being accepted as a podling.

> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?

The vote on general@incubator might suffice. If the
people working on a lab feel that it's time to move
to the Incubator, I don't see a need for additional
voting here.

cheers,
   Roland

>
> [1] http://labs.apache.org/faq.html#q7


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Roland Weber]

Roland Weber wrote:
>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>
> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.

The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html

 > The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.

On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.

So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
require a vote by the Labs PMC. In fact, it is a state change
that cannot even be decided by the Labs PMC, since the
Incubator PMC must accept the podling in the first place.
Once that happens, it makes no sense to keep the lab in
any other state than Promoted.

Just my 0.02€,
   Roland


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Roland Weber]

Roland Weber wrote:
> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
> require a vote by the Labs PMC.

I should read documents to the end before posting ;-(
This is in the "Guidelines Rationale" section of the Bylaws:

#> The reason why the Labs PMC has the power to vote a
#> state change even if the lab PI is in disagreement is
#> to allow the PMC to promote those labs that become
#> too active even if the labs PI and participants would
#> rather stay in the labs.

http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html


Roland Weber wrote:
> In fact, it is a state change
> that cannot even be decided by the Labs PMC, since the
> Incubator PMC must accept the podling in the first place.

That problem remains. Maybe the state name should
be changed to "promoting", and/or the description
to indicate that a lab in that state is "actively
striving to be accepted as a podling" or something
along that line. Files surely cannot be moved to the
incubation area until an Incubator vote has passed.
Or is there a special agreement between the Labs PMC
and the Incubator PMC that I'm not aware of?

cheers,
   Roland

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Santiago Gala]

El vie, 02-05-2008 a las 08:15 +0200, Roland Weber escribió:

> Roland Weber wrote:
> >> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
> >> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
> >
> > The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>
> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>
>  > The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>
> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
> > The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
> > to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>
> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
> require a vote by the Labs PMC. In fact, it is a state change
> that cannot even be decided by the Labs PMC, since the
> Incubator PMC must accept the podling in the first place.
> Once that happens, it makes no sense to keep the lab in
> any other state than Promoted.
>
> Just my 0.02€,
>    Roland
>

+1. Add my (binding) 0.02€ too :)

I don't think adding additional bureaucracy helps here: once a lab gets
accepted for incubation (goes to search for a community) it should get
promoted. The only caveat I can foresee is the need for a rollback if
incubation fails but the author wants to keep with it (highly unlikely
event, I guess we can't just "restart" the lab).

Regards
Santiago


>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

--
Santiago Gala
http://memojo.com/~sgala/blog/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Martin Cooper-2]

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber <ossfwot@...> wrote:

> Roland Weber wrote:
>
> > Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
> > > Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
> > >
> >
> > The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
> >
>
> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>
> > The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>
> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>
> > The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
> > to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
> >
>
> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
> require a vote by the Labs PMC.

I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC does. IMO
there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to change, and
Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a lab is no
longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require a PMC vote
to make such a change.

--
Martin Cooper

> In fact, it is a state change
> that cannot even be decided by the Labs PMC, since the
> Incubator PMC must accept the podling in the first place.
> Once that happens, it makes no sense to keep the lab in
> any other state than Promoted.
>
> Just my 0.02€,
>  Roland
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>
>

[Niall Pemberton]

Martin Cooper wrote:

> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber <ossfwot@...> wrote:
>
>> Roland Weber wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
>>>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>>>>
>>> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>>>
>> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
>> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
>> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>
>>> The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>>
>>> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
>>> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>>>
>> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
>> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
>> require a vote by the Labs PMC.
>
>
> I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC does. IMO
> there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to change, and
> Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a lab is no
> longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require a PMC vote
> to make such a change.

I agree with Roland and Santiago, if a lab gets accepted by the
incubator then I don't see any point in holding a vote here.

Niall

> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
>
>> In fact, it is a state change
>> that cannot even be decided by the Labs PMC, since the
>> Incubator PMC must accept the podling in the first place.
>> Once that happens, it makes no sense to keep the lab in
>> any other state than Promoted.
>>
>> Just my 0.02€,
>>  Roland

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Niall Pemberton wrote:

> Martin Cooper wrote:
>> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber <ossfwot@...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Roland Weber wrote:
>>>
>>>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
>>>>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>>>>>
>>>> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>>>>
>>> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
>>> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
>>> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>>
>>>> The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>>> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>>>
>>>> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
>>>> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>>>>
>>> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
>>> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
>>> require a vote by the Labs PMC.
>>
>>
>> I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC does. IMO
>> there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to change, and
>> Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a lab
>> is no
>> longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require a PMC
>> vote
>> to make such a change.
>
> I agree with Roland and Santiago, if a lab gets accepted by the
> incubator then I don't see any point in holding a vote here.

Let me put the chair hat on and let me say that the bylaws are somewhat
screwed in that regard (which I can say since I wrote them).

The assumption was that PIs would find it easier to work here in labs
than to go thru the process of incubation and that the incubator would
not have any problem accepting a labling as a podling.

But the current state is different: the PI wants the promotion and he's
afraid that incubator might refuse.

So, let's do it like this:

1) we can vote on whether or not we want the lab to be proposed to
incubation here, this should be a lazy binding PMC vote and just a heads
up from the lab PI

2) then the lab PI will go to the incubator asking for a podling and
telling them that he/she has the Lab PMC support (with the vote above)

3) once the lab exits and the incubated project starts, we automatically
change the state to 'promoted' (no need for another vote).

what do you say?

--
Stefano.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Bernd Fondermann]

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber <ossfwot@...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Roland Weber wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being promoted?
>>>>>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>>>>>>
>>>>> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>>>>>
>>>> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
>>>> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
>>>> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>>>
>>>>> The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>>>> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>>>>
>>>>> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
>>>>> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>>>>>
>>>> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
>>>> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
>>>> require a vote by the Labs PMC.
>>>
>>>
>>> I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC does.
>>> IMO
>>> there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to change,
>>> and
>>> Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a lab
>>> is no
>>> longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require a PMC
>>> vote
>>> to make such a change.
>>
>> I agree with Roland and Santiago, if a lab gets accepted by the
>> incubator then I don't see any point in holding a vote here.
>
> Let me put the chair hat on and let me say that the bylaws are somewhat
> screwed in that regard (which I can say since I wrote them).
>
> The assumption was that PIs would find it easier to work here in labs
> than to go thru the process of incubation and that the incubator would
> not have any problem accepting a labling as a podling.
>
> But the current state is different: the PI wants the promotion and he's
> afraid that incubator might refuse.

Speaking for Vysper, I have some personal exit criteria (whether they
would be overruled by the Labs PMC or not):

o One committer is not enough to go into incubation
o I'd like to see at least
   * two permanently contributing ASF committers (better 3)
   - or -
   * one permanently contributing ASF committer plus 2 other
   contributors (ASF committer or not)
In latter case, traffic on labs@ would be high enough to annoy people
and the project better moved on to some place where it would have a
distinct mailing list (incubator) and where outside contributors could
become committers eventually.

> So, let's do it like this:
>
> 1) we can vote on whether or not we want the lab to be proposed to
> incubation here, this should be a lazy binding PMC vote and just a heads
> up from the lab PI
>
> 2) then the lab PI will go to the incubator asking for a podling and
> telling them that he/she has the Lab PMC support (with the vote above)
>
> 3) once the lab exits and the incubated project starts, we automatically
> change the state to 'promoted' (no need for another vote).
>
> what do you say?

+1, but not right now for Vysper, let's still wait.


  Bernd

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Geir Magnusson Jr.-3]

What would we be actually voting on?

I'm not trying to be difficult.

It just seems that if the PI wants to approach the Incubator, he or  
she should.  Maybe this is some sort of vote just indicating support?

geir

On May 13, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber  
>>> <ossfwot@...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Roland Weber wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being  
>>>>> promoted?
>>>>>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>>>>>>
>>>>> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>>>>>
>>>> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
>>>> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
>>>> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>>>
>>>>> The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>>>> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>>>>
>>>>> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
>>>>> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>>>>>
>>>> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
>>>> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
>>>> require a vote by the Labs PMC.
>>>
>>>
>>> I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC  
>>> does. IMO
>>> there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to  
>>> change, and
>>> Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a  
>>> lab is no
>>> longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require a  
>>> PMC vote
>>> to make such a change.
>> I agree with Roland and Santiago, if a lab gets accepted by the  
>> incubator then I don't see any point in holding a vote here.
>
> Let me put the chair hat on and let me say that the bylaws are  
> somewhat screwed in that regard (which I can say since I wrote them).
>
> The assumption was that PIs would find it easier to work here in  
> labs than to go thru the process of incubation and that the  
> incubator would not have any problem accepting a labling as a podling.
>
> But the current state is different: the PI wants the promotion and  
> he's afraid that incubator might refuse.
>
> So, let's do it like this:
>
> 1) we can vote on whether or not we want the lab to be proposed to  
> incubation here, this should be a lazy binding PMC vote and just a  
> heads up from the lab PI
>
> 2) then the lab PI will go to the incubator asking for a podling and  
> telling them that he/she has the Lab PMC support (with the vote above)
>
> 3) once the lab exits and the incubated project starts, we  
> automatically change the state to 'promoted' (no need for another  
> vote).
>
> what do you say?
>
> --
> Stefano.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> What would we be actually voting on?
>
> I'm not trying to be difficult.
>
> It just seems that if the PI wants to approach the Incubator, he or she
> should.  Maybe this is some sort of vote just indicating support?

Right.

The PI says "hey, I think I'm ready to incubate my lab, what do you
think?" and we say "hmm, yeah" or "nah, you need this and that" with
lazy consensus.

Basically, this process needs to start somewhere and I wouldn't want a
PI to just ask incubator on his/her own without the labs pmc knowing
about it.

> geir
>
> On May 13, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber <ossfwot@...>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Roland Weber wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being
>>>>>> promoted?
>>>>>>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
>>>>> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
>>>>> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>>>>> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
>>>>>> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
>>>>> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
>>>>> require a vote by the Labs PMC.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC
>>>> does. IMO
>>>> there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to
>>>> change, and
>>>> Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a lab
>>>> is no
>>>> longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require a
>>>> PMC vote
>>>> to make such a change.
>>> I agree with Roland and Santiago, if a lab gets accepted by the
>>> incubator then I don't see any point in holding a vote here.
>>
>> Let me put the chair hat on and let me say that the bylaws are
>> somewhat screwed in that regard (which I can say since I wrote them).
>>
>> The assumption was that PIs would find it easier to work here in labs
>> than to go thru the process of incubation and that the incubator would
>> not have any problem accepting a labling as a podling.
>>
>> But the current state is different: the PI wants the promotion and
>> he's afraid that incubator might refuse.
>>
>> So, let's do it like this:
>>
>> 1) we can vote on whether or not we want the lab to be proposed to
>> incubation here, this should be a lazy binding PMC vote and just a
>> heads up from the lab PI
>>
>> 2) then the lab PI will go to the incubator asking for a podling and
>> telling them that he/she has the Lab PMC support (with the vote above)
>>
>> 3) once the lab exits and the incubated project starts, we
>> automatically change the state to 'promoted' (no need for another vote).
>>
>> what do you say?
>>
>> --
>> Stefano.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>

--
Stefano.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...

[Geir Magnusson Jr.-3]

Got it.  Makes sense.  Thx

geir


On May 14, 2008, at 9:14 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@...>  
wrote:

> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> What would we be actually voting on?
>> I'm not trying to be difficult.
>> It just seems that if the PI wants to approach the Incubator, he or  
>> she should.  Maybe this is some sort of vote just indicating support?
>
> Right.
>
> The PI says "hey, I think I'm ready to incubate my lab, what do you  
> think?" and we say "hmm, yeah" or "nah, you need this and that" with  
> lazy consensus.
>
> Basically, this process needs to start somewhere and I wouldn't want  
> a PI to just ask incubator on his/her own without the labs pmc  
> knowing about it.
>
>> geir
>> On May 13, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>> Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>>> Martin Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Roland Weber  
>>>>> <ossfwot@...> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Roland Weber wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are there any additional criteria on the labs side for being  
>>>>>>> promoted?
>>>>>>>> Most probably, there would be a vote. Anything else?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote on general@incubator might suffice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Labs Bylaws _seem_ to require a vote by
>>>>>> the Labs PMC to change the state of a lab:
>>>>>> http://labs.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Labs PMC can change the state of a lab with a majority vote.
>>>>>> On the other hand, the same Bylaws say:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The lab PI can change the state of the lab from active
>>>>>>> to idle and back at any time, just by updating the descriptor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So not all state changes require a vote here. I'd say that
>>>>>> the state change to Promoted is one of those that don't
>>>>>> require a vote by the Labs PMC.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I disagree. It's a question of oversight, which is what the PMC  
>>>>> does. IMO
>>>>> there needs to be a PMC vote if the status of oversight is to  
>>>>> change, and
>>>>> Promotion, as I understand it, is exactly that. Once promoted, a  
>>>>> lab is no
>>>>> longer under the purview of the Labs PMC, and it should require  
>>>>> a PMC vote
>>>>> to make such a change.
>>>> I agree with Roland and Santiago, if a lab gets accepted by the  
>>>> incubator then I don't see any point in holding a vote here.
>>>
>>> Let me put the chair hat on and let me say that the bylaws are  
>>> somewhat screwed in that regard (which I can say since I wrote  
>>> them).
>>>
>>> The assumption was that PIs would find it easier to work here in  
>>> labs than to go thru the process of incubation and that the  
>>> incubator would not have any problem accepting a labling as a  
>>> podling.
>>>
>>> But the current state is different: the PI wants the promotion and  
>>> he's afraid that incubator might refuse.
>>>
>>> So, let's do it like this:
>>>
>>> 1) we can vote on whether or not we want the lab to be proposed to  
>>> incubation here, this should be a lazy binding PMC vote and just a  
>>> heads up from the lab PI
>>>
>>> 2) then the lab PI will go to the incubator asking for a podling  
>>> and telling them that he/she has the Lab PMC support (with the  
>>> vote above)
>>>
>>> 3) once the lab exits and the incubated project starts, we  
>>> automatically change the state to 'promoted' (no need for another  
>>> vote).
>>>
>>> what do you say?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Stefano.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>
>
> --
> Stefano.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@...