Jetty Express is missing

Hi all

Is there any way to get Lucee Express with Jetty?

The current express version with tomcat is not possible in the current way we organize our development. We need at the moment the express jetty. No Jetty no Lucee… sorry.

Bye
Clemens

It’s just a web app so yes.
add the jars
add the servlet definition and off you go.

MD> On 6 Feb 2015, at 07:11, Kolbenschlag, Clemens <@Kolbenschlag_Clemens> wrote:

Hi all

Is there any way to get Lucee Express with Jetty?

The current express version with tomcat is not possible in the current way we organize our development. We need at the moment the express jetty. No Jetty no Lucee… sorry.

Bye
Clemens


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com mailto:lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/ED0A9D79440AB54EBDBB55E69BC9C8B701E86E7479C9%40media-dc03.media-muc.de https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/ED0A9D79440AB54EBDBB55E69BC9C8B701E86E7479C9%40media-dc03.media-muc.de?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

As much as your help in this case is most likely really appreciated, by Clemens but isn’t providing those builds just opening up the whole which-server-are-you-running-on-support-can-of-worms again?

Cheers,
Kai> the build process also generates a jetty express version, I just uploading it to here…

https://bitbucket.org/lucee/lucee/downloads

my upstream is extremely slow, so if you don’t see it now (11:10), wait a other minute or 2.

Micha

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Kolbenschlag, Clemens <@Kolbenschlag_Clemens> wrote:
Hi all

Is there any way to get Lucee Express with Jetty?

The current express version with tomcat is not possible in the current way we organize our development. We need at the moment the express jetty. No Jetty no Lucee… sorry.

Hi Micha,

Thank you very much for your time building a jetty express version of
Lucee. I am kind of getting used to it instead of tomcat.
I also hope that you will further support the jetty express version.

kind regards

vineri, 6 februarie 2015, 11:54:12 UTC+2, Clemens a scris:>

Hi all

Is there any way to get Lucee Express with Jetty?

The current express version with tomcat is not possible in the current way
we organize our development. We need at the moment the express jetty. No
Jetty no Lucee… sorry.

Bye

Clemens

As much as your help in this case is most likely really appreciated, by
Clemens but isn’t providing those builds just opening up the whole
which-server-are-you-running-on-support-can-of-worms again?

No. The problem is with the way people ask for help, not the amount of
things people can ask for help on. There’s nothing stopping anyone from
doing whatever they’d like, and asking for help on their chosen path.

I want to make it easy for people to choose the path they feel the most
comfortable with.

If we are clear on the downloads page, offering the “recommended” install
type first, and then providing a link to other options, I feel that would
be enough. (Especially since some of the options are really sweet, and
much easier than doing it “by hand”.)

Den “all about teh easy” UnoOn Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Kai Koenig wrote:

the build process also generates a jetty express version, I just uploading
it to here…
https://bitbucket.org/lucee/lucee/downloads

my upstream is extremely slow, so if you don’t see it now (11:10), wait a
other minute or 2.

MichaOn Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Kolbenschlag, Clemens < @Kolbenschlag_Clemens> wrote:

Hi all

Is there any way to get Lucee Express with Jetty?

The current express version with tomcat is not possible in the current way
we organize our development. We need at the moment the express jetty. No
Jetty no Lucee… sorry.

Bye

Clemens


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/ED0A9D79440AB54EBDBB55E69BC9C8B701E86E7479C9%40media-dc03.media-muc.de
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/ED0A9D79440AB54EBDBB55E69BC9C8B701E86E7479C9%40media-dc03.media-muc.de?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

As much as your help in this case is most likely really appreciated, by Clemens but isn’t providing those builds just opening up the whole which-server-are-you-running-on-support-can-of-worms again?

No. The problem is with the way people ask for help, not the amount of things people can ask for help on. There’s nothing stopping anyone from doing whatever they’d like, and asking for help on their chosen path.

I want to make it easy for people to choose the path they feel the most comfortable with.

If we are clear on the downloads page, offering the “recommended” install type first, and then providing a link to other options, I feel that would be enough. (Especially since some of the options are really sweet, and much easier than doing it "by hand”.)

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

Cheers
Kai

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I guess it depends on what you mean by “support”.

Apart from commercial support, quite easy:

If Lucee.org provides bundled builds and/or installers with a variety of servlet engines, people will consider those as supported, e.g. tested on (not only unit tests, but the whole thing - functional testing, integration testing etc)

Someone downloads a build from Lucee.org on Servlet Engine XYZ WILL come back to this mailing list (and rightfully so imho) expect some useful feedback/community support in getting his stuff going. If members of the Lucee foundation and this community are happy to do so, that’s fine. If such a community support however is then not supported people will get annoyed and pissed off and just say “That sh*t Lucee server THEY provide doesn’t even work properly”. And if you go over the old Railo mailing list you’ll see cases in which similar things happened (not to the extent of swearing), but people expecting support for a Railo-provided Jetty or Resin or whatever build where in reality most users on the list used Tomcat and wouldn’t have a) a clue or b) any interest in any other engine.

With a small community like this, I’d strongly recommend to provide the following only:

  • Source Code with Build instructions
  • .jar and .war builds for people to deploy on their own (and IF someone from a 3rd party writes up an instruction on who to do that on Jetty, IBM WebSphere or whatever, even better)
  • Express Builds on ONE Engine (preferably Tomcat imho)
  • Installers with ONE Engine (the same as in the Express Builds)

Cheers
Kai

Heroku, docker, and all the other platforms are much more important that quibbling over the servlet container.

I just wished I could do
sudo apt-get install lucee-single
or
sudo apt-get install lucee-multi

or sudo apt-get install lucee-tomcat8

Thoughts?

MD> On 7 Feb 2015, at 08:52, Michael Offner <@Michael_Offner> wrote:

For me it is much more of interest to be on platforms like heroku, than think about a hidden express version.

Micha

On Saturday, February 7, 2015, James Holmes <@James_Holmes mailto:James_Holmes> wrote:
Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential customers who never end up trying the product.

On Feb 7, 2015 3:39 PM, “denstar” <@denstar <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,’@denstar’);>> wrote:

I’d take 30 happy new users, minus 3 unhappy ones-- the happy ones will more than make up for the others.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAEhA4MqaS5%3Do198uHCBjYsunG_YT-7QESSE-6U2TQUt3%2B6XbCg%40mail.gmail.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAEhA4MqaS5%3Do198uHCBjYsunG_YT-7QESSE-6U2TQUt3%2B6XbCg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com mailto:lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAG%2BEEBze%3DR2i6-ohU64hpxsMu%3D22pv%2Bt8twOD4U0kuax0ckrUg%40mail.gmail.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAG%2BEEBze%3DR2i6-ohU64hpxsMu%3D22pv%2Bt8twOD4U0kuax0ckrUg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

For me it is much more of interest to be on platforms like heroku, than
think about a hidden express version.

MichaOn Saturday, February 7, 2015, James Holmes <@James_Holmes> wrote:

Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage
they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay
the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential
customers who never end up trying the product.

On Feb 7, 2015 3:39 PM, “denstar” <@denstar <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,’@denstar’);>> wrote:

I’d take 30 happy new users, minus 3 unhappy ones-- the happy ones will
more than make up for the others.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAEhA4MqaS5%3Do198uHCBjYsunG_YT-7QESSE-6U2TQUt3%2B6XbCg%40mail.gmail.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAEhA4MqaS5%3Do198uHCBjYsunG_YT-7QESSE-6U2TQUt3%2B6XbCg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee

Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I guess it depends on what you mean by “support”.

Apart from commercial support, quite easy:

If Lucee.org provides bundled builds and/or installers with a variety of
servlet engines, people will consider those as supported, e.g. tested on
(not only unit tests, but the whole thing - functional testing, integration
testing etc)

I see it differently. I think people will see a package running on their
favorite X, and go “hey, how cool is that, I can simply get Lucee on X!”

Maybe they wouldn’t have bothered to try it, had it not been for the X
factor.

I know I’m that way-- my brain relates things, and the more positive
relations to Lucee, the better, says I. (Plus, I loves me a lot of X, and
so “easy Lucee on X” is in my best interest-- that others like X too is
just icing on the cake.)

Someone downloads a build from Lucee.org on Servlet Engine XYZ WILL come
back to this mailing list (and rightfully so imho) expect some useful
feedback/community support in getting his stuff going. If members of the
Lucee foundation and this community are happy to do so, that’s fine. If
such a community support however is then not supported people will get
annoyed and pissed off and just say “That sh*t Lucee server THEY provide
doesn’t even work properly”. And if you go over the old Railo mailing list
you’ll see cases in which similar things happened (not to the extent of
swearing), but people expecting support for a Railo-provided Jetty or Resin
or whatever build where in reality most users on the list used Tomcat and
wouldn’t have a) a clue or b) any interest in any other engine.

We should ignore the many people who say they’re happy, because a few say
they are not? We are not selling the engine+tomcat (or any other
container). It’s reasonable to expect the packages to work, but beyond
that, we’re selling services.

And I love that. Seems like it’s the only way to move forward in an open
source world. Royalties are nice, but I’m not afraid of work-- I love what
I do.

I’d take 30 happy new users, minus 3 unhappy ones-- the happy ones will
more than make up for the others.

With a small community like this, I’d strongly recommend to provide the
following only:

  • Source Code with Build instructions
  • .jar and .war builds for people to deploy on their own (and IF someone
    from a 3rd party writes up an instruction on who to do that on Jetty, IBM
    WebSphere or whatever, even better)
  • Express Builds on ONE Engine (preferably Tomcat imho)
  • Installers with ONE Engine (the same as in the Express Builds)

So no RPM bundles/repos? No deb bundles/repos? No “all in one, all
dependencies included, ready to run” bundles?

What does an “express” build mean to you? Should we include mod_cfml with
it (vis-a-vis we’re expecting it to be used with either Apache or IIS)?
Why not call it “lucee-tomcat”?

I’ve got a feeling for what makes our community happy, and it isn’t making
things harder than they have to be. Limiting options is one way of making
things easy, I’ll give you that. I just don’t think it’s the best kind of
easy.

|DenOn Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Kai Koenig wrote:

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee
Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I guess it depends on what you mean by “support”.

I want Lucee to succeed, and lowering the barrier for entry is one (of
many) ways to make that happen.

Maybe we should just provide a link to the source code-- that’d make things
even easier! :-)p

-Den*

Yep, if I can just “fig up” and get a working server, I’m happy.

Heroku, docker, and all the other platforms are much more important that
quibbling over the servlet container.On Feb 7, 2015 8:04 PM, “Mark Drew” <@Mark_Drew> wrote:

I just wished I could do
sudo apt-get install lucee-single
or
sudo apt-get install lucee-multi

or sudo apt-get install lucee-tomcat8

Thoughts?

Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage
they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay
the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential
customers who never end up trying the product.On Feb 7, 2015 3:39 PM, “denstar” <@denstar> wrote:

I’d take 30 happy new users, minus 3 unhappy ones-- the happy ones will
more than make up for the others.

I’ve only quickly scanned through this thread, and will come back later
when I have more time to comment on some of the topics raised.

However, just quickly: regardless of what lucee.org does or does not
offer, I will be maintaining a Lucee on Jetty package.

Not referring to it as an “express” version because:
a) I don’t want it confused as an official build;
b) lots of people mistake “express” for “toy”.

I’ll say more later but got to go now.

Let me explain why there’s a jetty version in the first place. In fact this
version was first.
I did an update of the jetty version, then we discussed to move to tomcat,
not because tomcat is better, simply because tomcat is already used for the
installers.
So you have do deal only with one platform what makes life easier.
But I didn’t ditch the jetty version, it is still in the build process, but
it is not on the website (Lucee.org), I have no plan to change that, not
because of the extra effort it takes to support it, simply because it could
be confusing to have 2 distinct versions.
That is also the reason we have only one express version on the
homepage now, not 5 like in the past!
On the Railo mailing list the support questions for jetty was extremely
low, so having jetty in the download or in the build process will give us
not a lot of extra effort.
Let’s be pragmatic on that, everybody is free to give support for that
anyway. Maybe we will remove that version from the build process in the
future when it is outdated, but that will stop nobody to still build and
ask a lot of question about it. Hell on the Railo mailing list people was
asking for help with Railo on jrun!?

Las is not providing professional support anyway, only our members do, what
they support in their support contracts is up to them and not bound to what
is on the las homepage.

MichaOn Saturday, February 7, 2015, Adam Cameron <@Adam_Cameron1> wrote:

On Friday, 6 February 2015 23:54:42 UTC, Kai Koenig wrote:

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee
Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I’m with Kai on this. Lucee should only offer direct downloads for what
they themselves actively want to support. And perhaps provide a separate
place for community-driven initiatives, making it clear that those are
community-driven initiatives.

In my experience, the CFML community ten both towards being a bit: a)
needy; b) thick. So they will (willfully, I suspect) misunderstand the
difference between “hosted for download here”, and “supported here”.

And this is fairly easily headed-off by hosting them on a clearly-labelled
“third-party downloads” page or some such.

I would even consider hosting the binary installers for the general Tomcat
versions in such a way.

Lucee should only provide for what they themselves actively support. And
facilitate finding the stuff that third-parties provide/support.


Adam


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/2f083e86-c794-47f0-b8f2-e9a8eceb4bc5%40googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/2f083e86-c794-47f0-b8f2-e9a8eceb4bc5%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee
Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I’m with Kai on this. Lucee should only offer direct downloads for what
they themselves actively want to support. And perhaps provide a separate
place for community-driven initiatives, making it clear that those are
community-driven initiatives.

In my experience, the CFML community ten both towards being a bit: a)
needy; b) thick. So they will (willfully, I suspect) misunderstand the
difference between “hosted for download here”, and “supported here”.

And this is fairly easily headed-off by hosting them on a clearly-labelled
“third-party downloads” page or some such.

I would even consider hosting the binary installers for the general Tomcat
versions in such a way.

Lucee should only provide for what they themselves actively support. And
facilitate finding the stuff that third-parties provide/support.On Friday, 6 February 2015 23:54:42 UTC, Kai Koenig wrote:


Adam

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the Lucee
Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I’m with Kai on this. Lucee should only offer direct downloads for what
they themselves actively want to support. And perhaps provide a separate
place for community-driven initiatives, making it clear that those are
community-driven initiatives.

I was just being a bit thick.

In retrospect, this is the freaking web, right? Links are cool. A click
is a click. :slight_smile:

I like the idea of just having the war and the jar/libs, actually, and not
even having “express” on the main DL page, with links to cfmlprojects for
the various packages.

-DenOn Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Adam Cameron wrote:

On Friday, 6 February 2015 23:54:42 UTC, Kai Koenig wrote:

The express version has a long history, the first express version I did,
was a jetty blue dragon bundle long before Railo was even born, we sold
back then our CMS together with bd and a jre on a 16mb usb stick at a
conference, you could start then the CMS from the stick.
It was hard to reduce the bd and the jre to get it on that stick.

With that the express version was born ;-).

The idea of the express version is to play around, a toy in the end.
So the question is, are there better ways to do so today?

MichaAm Samstag, 7. Februar 2015 schrieb denstar :

On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Adam Cameron wrote:

On Friday, 6 February 2015 23:54:42 UTC, Kai Koenig wrote:

I disagree, you automatically create an expectation of whatever the
Lucee Foundation offering for download being in whatever way supported.

I’m with Kai on this. Lucee should only offer direct downloads for what
they themselves actively want to support. And perhaps provide a separate
place for community-driven initiatives, making it clear that those are
community-driven initiatives.

I was just being a bit thick.

In retrospect, this is the freaking web, right? Links are cool. A click
is a click. :slight_smile:

I like the idea of just having the war and the jar/libs, actually, and not
even having “express” on the main DL page, with links to cfmlprojects for
the various packages.

-Den


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com’);>.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,‘cvml’,‘lucee@googlegroups.com’);>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAOe-Q10eg7BQU%2BBGfXJdH_X%2B0rOD0kzmrFa%2BnX4uupEOb%2BwG_w%40mail.gmail.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAOe-Q10eg7BQU%2BBGfXJdH_X%2B0rOD0kzmrFa%2BnX4uupEOb%2BwG_w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Heroku, docker, and all the other platforms are much more important that
quibbling over the servlet container.

Your questions below were more about what I was after, I just got wrapped
up in a “what color should the car be” loop, which happens to the best of
us. :slight_smile:

I’ll spawn a new thread to address the names of the packages, and the multi
vs. single vs. shared jar vs. mod_cfml errata.

Naming cars is more fun that picking their colors!

-DenOn Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Mark Drew wrote:

I just wished I could do
sudo apt-get install lucee-single
or
sudo apt-get install lucee-multi

or sudo apt-get install lucee-tomcat8

Thoughts?

MD

On 7 Feb 2015, at 08:52, Michael Offner <@Michael_Offner> wrote:

For me it is much more of interest to be on platforms like heroku, than
think about a hidden express version.

Micha

On Saturday, February 7, 2015, James Holmes <@James_Holmes> wrote:

Actually, the cost of those unhappy customers is unknowable. They damage
they cause by actively detracting from the product spreads as others relay
the message. A few bad experiences might add up to well over 30 potential
customers who never end up trying the product.

On Feb 7, 2015 3:39 PM, “denstar” <@denstar> wrote:

I’d take 30 happy new users, minus 3 unhappy ones-- the happy ones will
more than make up for the others.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAEhA4MqaS5%3Do198uHCBjYsunG_YT-7QESSE-6U2TQUt3%2B6XbCg%40mail.gmail.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAEhA4MqaS5%3Do198uHCBjYsunG_YT-7QESSE-6U2TQUt3%2B6XbCg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAG%2BEEBze%3DR2i6-ohU64hpxsMu%3D22pv%2Bt8twOD4U0kuax0ckrUg%40mail.gmail.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/CAG%2BEEBze%3DR2i6-ohU64hpxsMu%3D22pv%2Bt8twOD4U0kuax0ckrUg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/A1B6C23D-A6DD-4497-999F-2C60DCBDD92E%40gmail.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/A1B6C23D-A6DD-4497-999F-2C60DCBDD92E%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.