You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sis.apache.org by Martin Desruisseaux <ma...@geomatys.fr> on 2012/09/10 13:37:43 UTC
New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version question
Hello all
After final adjustment to the Maven configuration, I should be able to
be back to code commits. I would like to create a "sis-build-helper"
module which would be strictly internal to the SIS project (not
deployed). This module would contains customized Javadoc taglets, Maven
mojo and other helper tools. The first code that I would like to commit
are Javadoc taglets already used by the "sis-metadata" module:
@preformat - for preformated text with very limited syntax coloring.
@module - for inserting link to the SIS module providing a class.
@note - for non-essential remarks (use smaller font)
@section - for splitting a large class javadoc in sections
However this raise an issue of which JDK version we target, since some
JDK tools API changed between JDK6 and JDK7. We need to support JDK6,
but there is some JDK7 feature that I found attractive. In
Geotoolkit.org I was used to do all my development with JDK7 - which
allow me to leverage try-with-resources, multi-catch, fork-join,
improved file systems API and more - then port the work to a JDK6 branch
about once per week. I found supporting 2 or 3 branches amazingly easy
with Mercurial compared to SVN as it stood 5 years ago. However I have
hear that SVN greatly improved its merging capability in the last few years.
How would peoples feel about developing in JDK7 and maintaining a JDK6
branch? If merging with today SVN is as easy as Mercurial, I would not
mind to do this maintenance, since I'm already doing it for one year on
Geotk...
Martin
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
+1 to both proposals from me.
Cheers,
Chris
On Sep 11, 2012, at 8:15 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
> On the subject of creating a sis-build-helper module for SIS building purpose only (not to be deployed), is there any objection?
>
> Following on that path, I would like to create a sis-utility module. I would like to start putting resource bundles in it. Is there any objection? That would be the two only additional modules needed for continuing on sis-metadata.
>
> Martin
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by Martin Desruisseaux <ma...@geomatys.fr>.
On the subject of creating a sis-build-helper module for SIS building
purpose only (not to be deployed), is there any objection?
Following on that path, I would like to create a sis-utility module. I
would like to start putting resource bundles in it. Is there any
objection? That would be the two only additional modules needed for
continuing on sis-metadata.
Martin
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hey Martin,
Gotcha, well I am actually using an old Maven version (2.2.1) because of my needs to support
Apache OODT with it ;) However, I am happy to try upgrading to a newer version of 3 for SIS,
since it's easy to install multiple mvn versions.
That being said, you can always contact the builds@apache.org list and/or subscribe to it
using builds-subscribe@apache.org. That list is where the infra@ peeps who maintain Jenkins
and other CI tools for the ASF can be contacted and software can be requested for the Jenkins
machines. Feel free to request an updated version of mvn to be installed there as well.
Cheers,
Chris
On Sep 13, 2012, at 3:02 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
> Hello all
>
> We got many Jenkins failures recently. This is because Jenkins on Apache servers is still using Maven 3.0.3, while I though that Maven 3.0.4 (released last January) was widely spread. The sis-build-helper module uses the ${maven.version} property, which is indeed a very useful information when writing Maven plugins. But this property has been introduced only in Maven 3.0.4.
>
> Are anyone in SIS using Maven 3.0.4, or do we need to support older Maven versions? A workaround for older versions is to specify the property explicitly on the command line (e.g. "--define maven.version=3.0.3"), which is what I did for Jenkins. However if many peoples are using older Maven versions, we would probably need to modify the pom.xml for supporting them.
>
> Martin
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by Martin Desruisseaux <ma...@geomatys.fr>.
Hello all
We got many Jenkins failures recently. This is because Jenkins on Apache
servers is still using Maven 3.0.3, while I though that Maven 3.0.4
(released last January) was widely spread. The sis-build-helper module
uses the ${maven.version} property, which is indeed a very useful
information when writing Maven plugins. But this property has been
introduced only in Maven 3.0.4.
Are anyone in SIS using Maven 3.0.4, or do we need to support older
Maven versions? A workaround for older versions is to specify the
property explicitly on the command line (e.g. "--define
maven.version=3.0.3"), which is what I did for Jenkins. However if many
peoples are using older Maven versions, we would probably need to modify
the pom.xml for supporting them.
Martin
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by Martin Desruisseaux <ma...@geomatys.fr>.
Le 12/09/12 00:50, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) a écrit :
> So far it looks like most SIS developers are still on 10.6.8 (at least the ones that have chimed in and said they are on Mac :) ), so I
> would be +1 for the trunk to stay JDK6 (for now). If as it turns out, you (and others) are the one doing the work, but the JDK6'ers are not,
> and you (the JDK7'ers) think trunk should be 10.7 (JDK7+), then so be it and we can swap that with our branch-jdk6 at that point.
>
> Fair enough?
Sure, I think it is probably the most reasonable approach. If there is
no objection in the next days, I would probably create a JDK7 branch
next week.
Martin
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hey Martin,
On Sep 11, 2012, at 4:21 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
> Le 11/09/12 03:13, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) a écrit :
>> Based on this we may want to hold off on JDK7 b/c I know a number of the SIS
>> devs are Mac-based. Unless there is some other solution?
>
> Actually I'm on Mac too, but this is Lion (10.7). On this version, I didn't meet any problem with JDK7. However in my understanding of some blogs I have read, I think that Oracle has no intend to port JDK7 to earlier MacOS.
>
> The proposal would not force users to migrate to JDK7, since we would maintain a JDK6 branch. However it could force developers to use JDK7 if we select that version as the trunk. A possible approach could be that we keep "trunk" on JDK6, I create a JDK7 branch, do my development on that branch and test merging with today SVN. An inconvenient is that trunk would not be really "trunk" for everyone - I mean my commit messages would likely be more detailed on the JDK7 branch... If we realize that this approach is too difficult in practice, we would revisit then.
Sure that's one option. We have some projects at Apache that I'm involved in that have a few different active branches (e.g., Nutch, Hadoop, Lucene/Solr, etc.) so
this approach can work fine.
So far it looks like most SIS developers are still on 10.6.8 (at least the ones that have chimed in and said they are on Mac :) ), so I
would be +1 for the trunk to stay JDK6 (for now). If as it turns out, you (and others) are the one doing the work, but the JDK6'ers are not,
and you (the JDK7'ers) think trunk should be 10.7 (JDK7+), then so be it and we can swap that with our branch-jdk6 at that point.
Fair enough?
Cheers,
Chris
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by Martin Desruisseaux <ma...@geomatys.fr>.
Le 11/09/12 03:13, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) a écrit :
> Based on this we may want to hold off on JDK7 b/c I know a number of the SIS
> devs are Mac-based. Unless there is some other solution?
Actually I'm on Mac too, but this is Lion (10.7). On this version, I
didn't meet any problem with JDK7. However in my understanding of some
blogs I have read, I think that Oracle has no intend to port JDK7 to
earlier MacOS.
The proposal would not force users to migrate to JDK7, since we would
maintain a JDK6 branch. However it could force developers to use JDK7 if
we select that version as the trunk. A possible approach could be that
we keep "trunk" on JDK6, I create a JDK7 branch, do my development on
that branch and test merging with today SVN. An inconvenient is that
trunk would not be really "trunk" for everyone - I mean my commit
messages would likely be more detailed on the JDK7 branch... If we
realize that this approach is too difficult in practice, we would
revisit then.
Martin
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hey Guys,
Based on this we may want to hold off on JDK7 b/c I know a number of the SIS
devs are Mac-based. Unless there is some other solution?
Cheers,
Chris
On Sep 10, 2012, at 11:05 AM, Ramirez, Paul M (388J) wrote:
> Hey Adam,
>
> Quick looking around and it appears that JDK7 on the Mac is also limited
> at this time to:
>
> The installation of JRE and JDK of 7u6 (or later) requires Mac OS X 10.7.3
> (Lion) or later.
>
>
> I'm not sure if this same restriction applies to the developer preview
> http://jdk7.java.net/download.html?
>
> --Paul
>
>
> On 9/10/12 10:52 AM, "Adam Estrada" <es...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> JDK7 is a real pain to install/use on Mac. I recently came across a
>> project that relied on it and found several articles that pretty much
>> said to NOT use JDK7 on this OS. Just my $0.02 but thought I would
>> mention it in case there are other Mac users out there who could
>> potentially come across similar issues.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> On Sep 10, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> A couple things:
>>>
>>> * We discussed JDK6 a while back for SIS:
>>>
>>> http://s.apache.org/Z4A
>>>
>>> There wasn't strong opposition to JDK6 on any side of the fence.
>>> I don't think there will be opposition to using JDK7 here though I
>>> do my work on a Mac with OS 10.6.8 -- do you know if JDK7 is
>>> available for that version of Mac?
>>>
>>> * You are offering to do the work to help maintain the JDK6 branch.
>>> I would also be willing to help maintain it. So that is a good enough
>>> start for me to say +1 on it.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello all
>>>>
>>>> After final adjustment to the Maven configuration, I should be able to
>>>> be back to code commits. I would like to create a "sis-build-helper"
>>>> module which would be strictly internal to the SIS project (not
>>>> deployed). This module would contains customized Javadoc taglets, Maven
>>>> mojo and other helper tools. The first code that I would like to commit
>>>> are Javadoc taglets already used by the "sis-metadata" module:
>>>>
>>>> @preformat - for preformated text with very limited syntax coloring.
>>>> @module - for inserting link to the SIS module providing a class.
>>>> @note - for non-essential remarks (use smaller font)
>>>> @section - for splitting a large class javadoc in sections
>>>>
>>>> However this raise an issue of which JDK version we target, since some
>>>> JDK tools API changed between JDK6 and JDK7. We need to support JDK6,
>>>> but there is some JDK7 feature that I found attractive. In
>>>> Geotoolkit.org I was used to do all my development with JDK7 - which
>>>> allow me to leverage try-with-resources, multi-catch, fork-join,
>>>> improved file systems API and more - then port the work to a JDK6
>>>> branch about once per week. I found supporting 2 or 3 branches
>>>> amazingly easy with Mercurial compared to SVN as it stood 5 years ago.
>>>> However I have hear that SVN greatly improved its merging capability in
>>>> the last few years.
>>>>
>>>> How would peoples feel about developing in JDK7 and maintaining a JDK6
>>>> branch? If merging with today SVN is as easy as Mercurial, I would not
>>>> mind to do this maintenance, since I'm already doing it for one year on
>>>> Geotk...
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>>> Senior Computer Scientist
>>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>>> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by "Ramirez, Paul M (388J)" <pa...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hey Adam,
Quick looking around and it appears that JDK7 on the Mac is also limited
at this time to:
The installation of JRE and JDK of 7u6 (or later) requires Mac OS X 10.7.3
(Lion) or later.
I'm not sure if this same restriction applies to the developer preview
http://jdk7.java.net/download.html?
--Paul
On 9/10/12 10:52 AM, "Adam Estrada" <es...@gmail.com> wrote:
>JDK7 is a real pain to install/use on Mac. I recently came across a
>project that relied on it and found several articles that pretty much
>said to NOT use JDK7 on this OS. Just my $0.02 but thought I would
>mention it in case there are other Mac users out there who could
>potentially come across similar issues.
>
>Adam
>
>On Sep 10, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> A couple things:
>>
>> * We discussed JDK6 a while back for SIS:
>>
>> http://s.apache.org/Z4A
>>
>> There wasn't strong opposition to JDK6 on any side of the fence.
>> I don't think there will be opposition to using JDK7 here though I
>> do my work on a Mac with OS 10.6.8 -- do you know if JDK7 is
>> available for that version of Mac?
>>
>> * You are offering to do the work to help maintain the JDK6 branch.
>> I would also be willing to help maintain it. So that is a good enough
>> start for me to say +1 on it.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>> On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all
>>>
>>> After final adjustment to the Maven configuration, I should be able to
>>>be back to code commits. I would like to create a "sis-build-helper"
>>>module which would be strictly internal to the SIS project (not
>>>deployed). This module would contains customized Javadoc taglets, Maven
>>>mojo and other helper tools. The first code that I would like to commit
>>>are Javadoc taglets already used by the "sis-metadata" module:
>>>
>>> @preformat - for preformated text with very limited syntax coloring.
>>> @module - for inserting link to the SIS module providing a class.
>>> @note - for non-essential remarks (use smaller font)
>>> @section - for splitting a large class javadoc in sections
>>>
>>> However this raise an issue of which JDK version we target, since some
>>>JDK tools API changed between JDK6 and JDK7. We need to support JDK6,
>>>but there is some JDK7 feature that I found attractive. In
>>>Geotoolkit.org I was used to do all my development with JDK7 - which
>>>allow me to leverage try-with-resources, multi-catch, fork-join,
>>>improved file systems API and more - then port the work to a JDK6
>>>branch about once per week. I found supporting 2 or 3 branches
>>>amazingly easy with Mercurial compared to SVN as it stood 5 years ago.
>>>However I have hear that SVN greatly improved its merging capability in
>>>the last few years.
>>>
>>> How would peoples feel about developing in JDK7 and maintaining a JDK6
>>>branch? If merging with today SVN is as easy as Mercurial, I would not
>>>mind to do this maintenance, since I'm already doing it for one year on
>>>Geotk...
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Senior Computer Scientist
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version question
Posted by Adam Estrada <es...@gmail.com>.
JDK7 is a real pain to install/use on Mac. I recently came across a project that relied on it and found several articles that pretty much said to NOT use JDK7 on this OS. Just my $0.02 but thought I would mention it in case there are other Mac users out there who could potentially come across similar issues.
Adam
On Sep 10, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> A couple things:
>
> * We discussed JDK6 a while back for SIS:
>
> http://s.apache.org/Z4A
>
> There wasn't strong opposition to JDK6 on any side of the fence.
> I don't think there will be opposition to using JDK7 here though I
> do my work on a Mac with OS 10.6.8 -- do you know if JDK7 is
> available for that version of Mac?
>
> * You are offering to do the work to help maintain the JDK6 branch.
> I would also be willing to help maintain it. So that is a good enough
> start for me to say +1 on it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
>
>> Hello all
>>
>> After final adjustment to the Maven configuration, I should be able to be back to code commits. I would like to create a "sis-build-helper" module which would be strictly internal to the SIS project (not deployed). This module would contains customized Javadoc taglets, Maven mojo and other helper tools. The first code that I would like to commit are Javadoc taglets already used by the "sis-metadata" module:
>>
>> @preformat - for preformated text with very limited syntax coloring.
>> @module - for inserting link to the SIS module providing a class.
>> @note - for non-essential remarks (use smaller font)
>> @section - for splitting a large class javadoc in sections
>>
>> However this raise an issue of which JDK version we target, since some JDK tools API changed between JDK6 and JDK7. We need to support JDK6, but there is some JDK7 feature that I found attractive. In Geotoolkit.org I was used to do all my development with JDK7 - which allow me to leverage try-with-resources, multi-catch, fork-join, improved file systems API and more - then port the work to a JDK6 branch about once per week. I found supporting 2 or 3 branches amazingly easy with Mercurial compared to SVN as it stood 5 years ago. However I have hear that SVN greatly improved its merging capability in the last few years.
>>
>> How would peoples feel about developing in JDK7 and maintaining a JDK6 branch? If merging with today SVN is as easy as Mercurial, I would not mind to do this maintenance, since I'm already doing it for one year on Geotk...
>>
>> Martin
>>
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
Re: New module proposal: sis-build-helper - and related JDK version
question
Posted by "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <ch...@jpl.nasa.gov>.
Hi Martin,
A couple things:
* We discussed JDK6 a while back for SIS:
http://s.apache.org/Z4A
There wasn't strong opposition to JDK6 on any side of the fence.
I don't think there will be opposition to using JDK7 here though I
do my work on a Mac with OS 10.6.8 -- do you know if JDK7 is
available for that version of Mac?
* You are offering to do the work to help maintain the JDK6 branch.
I would also be willing to help maintain it. So that is a good enough
start for me to say +1 on it.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Chris
On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
> Hello all
>
> After final adjustment to the Maven configuration, I should be able to be back to code commits. I would like to create a "sis-build-helper" module which would be strictly internal to the SIS project (not deployed). This module would contains customized Javadoc taglets, Maven mojo and other helper tools. The first code that I would like to commit are Javadoc taglets already used by the "sis-metadata" module:
>
> @preformat - for preformated text with very limited syntax coloring.
> @module - for inserting link to the SIS module providing a class.
> @note - for non-essential remarks (use smaller font)
> @section - for splitting a large class javadoc in sections
>
> However this raise an issue of which JDK version we target, since some JDK tools API changed between JDK6 and JDK7. We need to support JDK6, but there is some JDK7 feature that I found attractive. In Geotoolkit.org I was used to do all my development with JDK7 - which allow me to leverage try-with-resources, multi-catch, fork-join, improved file systems API and more - then port the work to a JDK6 branch about once per week. I found supporting 2 or 3 branches amazingly easy with Mercurial compared to SVN as it stood 5 years ago. However I have hear that SVN greatly improved its merging capability in the last few years.
>
> How would peoples feel about developing in JDK7 and maintaining a JDK6 branch? If merging with today SVN is as easy as Mercurial, I would not mind to do this maintenance, since I'm already doing it for one year on Geotk...
>
> Martin
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++