Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cloud Google Open Source Programming

Google Code Deprecates Download Service For Project Hosting 185

Posted by timothy
from the look-but-don't-slurp dept.
New submitter c0d3g33k writes "Google Project Hosting announced changes to the Download service on Wednesday, offering only 'increasing misuse of the service and a desire to keep our community safe and secure' by way of explanation. Effective immediately, existing projects that offer no downloads and all new projects will no longer be able to create downloads. Existing projects which currently have downloads will lose the ability to create new downloads by January 2014, though existing downloads will remain available 'for the foreseeable future.' Google Drive is recommended as an alternative, but this will likely have to be done manually by project maintainers since the ability to create and manage downloads won't be part of the Project Hosting tools. This is a rather baffling move, since distributing project files via download is integral to FOSS culture."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Code Deprecates Download Service For Project Hosting

Comments Filter:
  • by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @03:40PM (#43806299) Homepage Journal

    Becomes, "Don't Be Open."

    This is a rather baffling move, since distributing project files via download is integral to FOSS culture."

    Considering the recent spate of incidents involving Google taking a shit on the FOSS community that helped to create it, I don't find it baffling at all.

    Google is finally turning into the dickhead actor who got rich and forgot who his real friends are.

    • by Luthair (847766) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @03:52PM (#43806415)
      Github also had to discontinue file downloads for the simple fact that people abused it and used the service as a way to distribute content unrelated to the open source material.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cheesybagel (670288)

        Any public file sharing system is liable to be abused period. This includes version control systems. It is no excuse for yanking the service. FWIW I have never seen people abuse either of those services for file serving.

        • by jandrese (485)
          I've never seen it either, but I know that it must happen because it's so obvious.
        • by DragonWriter (970822) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @06:40PM (#43807785)

          Any public file sharing system is liable to be abused period. This includes version control systems.

          (1) Version control systems, unlike file downloads, are central to the purpose for which Google provides Google Code, to wit, facilitate developer-to-developer collaboration on open-source projects.
          (2) Version control systems, unlike file downloads, are not particularly widely abused for hosting malware to be distributed through emailing deceptive links to unsophisticated users.

          • by mysidia (191772)

            Version control systems, unlike file downloads, are not particularly widely abused for hosting malware to be distributed through emailing deceptive links to unsophisticated users.

            This is easily prevented by not allowing direct download links. For example, by requiring a hashcode in the HTTP request string accompanied by a cookie which is only set by answering a prompt.

            and by restricting the files that can be made downloadable to .tar.gz and .zip files.

            • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2013 @10:01PM (#43808841)

              I suspect you may have misunderstood how one would actually abuse this.

              I email you (or, say, your mom) a link saying Malwarebytes v.10 is now available for download, and it fixes a critical vulnerability and needs to be updated soon or you're at risk. Go to code.google.com/malwarebytes , a project that I've created. I might even populate it with something looking like code that would match, to trick people who are more technical than they really are.

              A non-technical user may see that it's it's hosted at Google, and, having some trust for them, they choose to download. Your prompt shows up (what that accomplishes I don't know, so I assume the user, already intent on downloading it, answers it.)

              So, by your second rule, they download MalwareBytes.zip, which contains MalwareBytes.exe (actually malware), and voila. 0wned.

          • by goombah99 (560566) on Friday May 24, 2013 @02:04AM (#43809945)

            here's there new Lic terms for all google code:

            D&R (Death and Repudiation) License
            ========

            This software may not be used directly by any living being. ANY use of this
            software (even perfectly legitimate and non-commercial uses) until after death
            is explicitly restricted. Any living being using (or attempting to use) this software
            will be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

            For your protection, corpses will not be punished. We respectfully request
            that you submit your uses (revisions, uses, distributions, uses, etc.) to
            your children, who may vicariously perform these uses on your behalf. If
            you use this software and you are found to be not dead, you will be punished
            to the fullest extent of the law.

            If you are found to be a ghost or angel, you will be punished to the fullest
            extent of the law.

            After your following the terms of this license, the author has vowed to repudiate
            your claim, meaning that the validity of this contract will no longer be recognized.
            This license will be unexpectedly revoked (at a time which is designated to be
            most inconvenient) and involved heirs will be punished to the fullest extent
            of the law.

            Furthermore, if any parties (related or non-related) escape the punishments
            outlined herein, they will be severely punished to the fullest extent of a new
            revised law that (1) expands the statement "fullest extent of the law" to encompass
            an infinite duration of infinite punishments and (2) exacts said punishments
            upon all parties (related or non-related).

      • Github also had to discontinue file downloads for the simple fact that people abused it and used the service as a way to distribute content unrelated to the open source material.

        Doesn't that kinda defeat the purpose of github?

        (Not a coder, wouldn't know)

        • by EvilIdler (21087)
          No. GitHub uses, as the name implies, Git. You git clone the source code :) People will just have to get used to hosting binaries on some other site, though. Just look at how quickly Flickr got a workaround to allow any file (you can find it on GitHub, incidentally).
      • How were people abusing Github downloads? How are people abusing Google Code? What makes Google think people won't similarly abuse Google Drive?

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Github used to have an API that would allow you to upload & host arbitrary binary blobs and make them available from your project's download page. They discontinued THAT service, because people were abusing. And probably, causing a lot of expense in disk, file server, and bandwidth costs for github.

          You can still create git repositories, and clone them, and upload and share code, etc. etc. etc. You just can't upload arbitrary binary files and redistribute them via github. For projects that want to re

        • by DragonWriter (970822) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @06:42PM (#43807801)

          How are people abusing Google Code?

          Using the file download hosting feature to host malware and sending emails with deceptive links to that malware to distribute it to unsuspecting users seems to be one of the main abuses.

      • like google summer of code does, like gcc compile farm does, like slashdot story queue does. its not rocket science.

    • by larry bagina (561269) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:13PM (#43806569) Journal
      They're pushing google drive for downloads. That makes sense on a couple levels -- forced encouragement of google drive and removing redundant functionality -- but this is google so you have to wonder what's next. So... what is next? Will you need to login with google+ to download? Maybe click a few adds before your download begins? Auto download Chrome for you, just in case?
      • by chris_mahan (256577) <chris.mahan@gmail.com> on Thursday May 23, 2013 @05:25PM (#43807217) Homepage

        Can't use google drive from work.

      • by c0lo (1497653)

        They're pushing google drive for downloads. That makes sense on a couple levels -- forced encouragement of google drive and removing redundant functionality -- but this is google so you have to wonder what's next.

        Yes, make perfect sense... You see, there's no way in which Google Drive can be misused.

        (grin)

      • > what is next? Will you need to login with google+ to download?

        That is what I expect. I think if Google+ had Facebook's marketshare they would already be doing that sort of thing across most of google''s services.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2013 @03:47PM (#43806363)
    Google seems to be in a "Fuck everything I've ever done!" phase.
  • So? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2013 @03:50PM (#43806389)

    Github did exactly the same thing quite some time ago, and people didn't complain too much. Why is this a big deal?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by AlphaBro (2809233)
      Thousands of people go to my Google Code download page to get the latest versions of my software without having to worry about compiling it. This is shitty.
      • by pmontra (738736)
        Sourceforge has software downloads. You might consider moving your project there.
        • by AlphaBro (2809233)
          I actually moved all my projects from Sourceforge to Google Code a while ago. SF felt antiquated, sluggish, and unstable; features as simple as the download counter broke all the time. If this is really what's to become of GC, I'll probably head to CodePlex since it feels cleaner than SF and has TFS support.
          • by Nerdfest (867930)

            I believe SourceForge is working on updating their site. I seem to also remember them looking for volunteers.

      • by Orphis (1356561)

        Nothing prevents you to put a link to the binaries on your website. And if you can't afford a to host a website, there are still file hosting service happy to finally get some legal files.

        Also, you know, there were some malware abusing the system and downloading some files on some popular legitimate projects ( http://news.softpedia.com/news/New-TDL-Malware-Variant-Uses-Chromium-Embedded-Framework-339791.shtml [softpedia.com] ). I don't know many projects affected beside this one and I'm sure Google knows better and this mo

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by FireFury03 (653718)

          Nothing prevents you to put a link to the binaries on your website. And if you can't afford a to host a website, there are still file hosting service happy to finally get some legal files.

          Also, you know, there were some malware abusing the system and downloading some files on some popular legitimate projects ( http://news.softpedia.com/news/New-TDL-Malware-Variant-Uses-Chromium-Embedded-Framework-339791.shtml [softpedia.com] ). I don't know many projects affected beside this one and I'm sure Google knows better and this move wasn't just to mess around with legitimate users and reduce the costs.

          Google seems to be cutting lots of services in the name of abuse...

          Google Code downloads gone because they were being abused.
          XMPP federation gone because it was being used by spammers.
          CalDAV gone because... well, that one just seems to be because its open and Google wants to push everyone to their proprietary APIs instead.

          I'm just waiting for them to pull the plug on email federation with Gmail and Google web search because they both get used by spammers too...

          Guess what; pretty much any useful service is g

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by larry bagina (561269)
        It's like Barack Obama says - "you didn't build that". Providing pre-compiled software is dangerous since it teaches people that FREE Software and Open Source are about price. I don't provide pre-compiled binaries or documentation for my code. I also intentionally leave in some easy to fix bugs. My users need to edit and compile the source code to run it. My users need to read the source code to understand the cryptic error messages. That's the only way they'll truly appreciate Open Source software.
        • Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Aaden42 (198257) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:52PM (#43806979) Homepage

          RMS, is that you?

          Not sure what domain your project is in, but unless your target market is "Linux, Emacs users who know C" odds are you're cutting a goodly number of potential users out with that attitude. Certainly there are tools that is appropriate for, but the VAST majority of users don't have a compiler on their systems, much less know how to use one.

          Is that a tragedy of the Microsoft-ocracy keeping the world closed for users? I don't think so. [Car analogy coming up] Just because I could technically acquire all of the tools and knowhow to replace any particular part on my car, doesn't mean it's the best use of my money and time to do so. Even if the tools were all free (as in the case of GCC et al.), it's unlikely that it would be in the best interests of a non-techy to take the time to learn to use them, much less learn to troubleshoot them when `./configure && make && make install` doesn't go according to plan. To many people, computers are just tools to get other non-computer related work done, and there's nothing wrong with that. Some people like to tinker with their cars, others just want to drive to work and park them.

          Even a user who doesn't know how to fix bugs & recompile can be a useful asset to an Open Source project. I've found that some of my non-technical users are the most details oriented when it comes to finding edge case bugs and documenting what it takes to reproduce them. Often enough those are the kinds of bugs that take me two minutes to fix but would have taken hours to track down if not for a complete reproducer reported by a user.

          As far as giving people the wrong idea about Free Software, which is worse: Users thinking Free Software is about the price or that it's unusable junk that only nerd/hacker/terr'ists actually use? I've already read articles where less-than-savy authority/law enforcement types have considered simply having Linux installed on a system as evidence of criminal activity. Making Free Software cryptic and difficult to use (neigh unto impossible for certain groups of users) certainly doesn't advance the cause any.

        • by matrim99 (123693)

          A true vanguard. You rock!

          In order to help your users even further, you may want to think about devolving your app to just pseudo-code. I'm sure that your choice of programming language has given pause to many upcoming Logo programmers out there.

          • Re:So? (Score:5, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2013 @06:11PM (#43807589)

            I prefer avoiding pseudocode altogether, wouldn't want users to get too comfortable. i prefer this approach - a single source file with these contents:

            File name: AwesomeSoftware.cpp
            /*

                    don't forget #include the stuff your software will need to compile and run!

                    enter your code below in proper C++ syntax. It should do what you need.

                    If you don't know what to write, you should probably go read lots of books
                    and take a 4 year undergraduate program in Computer Science. Then
                    maybe you won't be such a fucking retard, luser. I don't work for you, and
                    I sure as shit am not getting paid by you.

                    This file is licensed using GPLv3.

            */

            I like to then provide a makefile with these contents:

            # Make sure you have no errors in your file before you attempt to build!
            all :
                      @ echo "Compiling your shit."
                      g++ AwesomeSoftware.cpp -o AwesomeSoftware
                      @ echo "Cleaning up!"
                      rm -f AwesomeSoftware.cpp

            I find this to be the best way to spread the good word of open source and teach people good development practices.

            God Bless Richard Stallman. God Bless Linus Torvalds.

    • Because it is a crap policy. A lot of people will want binaries or packages rather than download source code. Many people do not even have a versioning system installed or will want to download the latest stable source code rather than muck around with an unstable internal development milestone.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by BasilBrush (643681)

        Of course they do. Because most OSS software won't compile without error. 9 times out of ten it takes some amount of fucking about and searching to find what's missing or what arcane thing needs typing at the console to make it build. If you're not a developer don't bother.

    • Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Rakishi (759894) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:09PM (#43806543)

      People did complain. Amusingly, the biggest counterpoint was that if you want to offer downloads you should probably use google code which is much more user (rather than programmer) friendly.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by EvanED (569694)

        Amusingly, the biggest counterpoint was that if you want to offer downloads you should probably use google code which is much more user (rather than programmer) friendly.

        That's pretty much my view too.

        The way I looked at things was that Google Code and SourceForge are a lot more centered around what an end user would want to see (either someone who has no idea about version control and coding, or for a library or something like that even a programmer but who just wants to grab a library to use) while GitHub

    • Because this is slashdot, and it has become hip to point at any curating or reducing of their free services as violating "dont be evil".

    • by Nerdfest (867930)

      GitHub doesn't have competitors that pay people to spread FUD.

  • And another one gone and another one gone...
    Another one bites the dust!
    Hey! I'm gonna get you too!
    Another one bites the dust!

  • by oGMo (379) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @03:53PM (#43806439)

    Github did this recently [github.com] too which was annoying, because it was useful. They're not entirely clear why ... "confusing" doesn't seem nearly as likely as "abuse", though I am not aware of any abuse in particular. Since Google is providing Drive as an alternative, and not even immediately removing the service for those using it, it's not even as bad as Github's move, which removed it for everyone. I suppose it's an opportunity to cut another Google dependency though if you really want.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by cheesybagel (670288)

      True. But Google Drive is not exactly known for easy to read URLs.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:58PM (#43807023)

        True. But Google Drive is not exactly known for easy to read URLs.

        What are you talking about, [USER_TYPE:HUMAN UNIT:670288]? [LINE FEED] Values derived from hash functions of sufficient length are superior sorting and indexing mechanisms for long-term persistence of non-volatile data structures. The use of values that map directly to integers provide search efficiency of big-O-one as opposed to [STRING] searching, which is typically big-O-log-n or worse. You, [USER_TYPE:HUMAN UNIT:670288], must have a malfunction in your [LOGIC-PROCESSING DESIGN] and must obtain maintenance before further conversation can be attempted reliably. [END COMMUNICATION]

  • by icebike (68054) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:01PM (#43806477)

    I know more than a few projects using code.google.com that have downloads from a separate server, perhaps to get around some inconvienences already built into the system.

    Maybe the cost of bandwidth is getting to be significant, or maybe it is due to abuse. The announcement seems to suggest people were creating projects just to distribute large files, probably copyrighted material, (and possibly malware), and getting Google to host it for free.

    Still, if you have to set up two or more different services to host your project, why would you bother with the one that didn't allow project downloads? What would be the point of using that on a community project? It would seem this would drive the community away. Perhaps this telegraphs the death knell for yet another Google service?

    • Maybe the cost of bandwidth is getting to be significant, or maybe it is due to abuse.

      I can't imagine it's bandwidth, because no matter how many projects are there the bandwidth needs are going to be miniscule compared to another of their free services - YouTube.

      • by icebike (68054)

        Well, most projects don't carry advertising. YouTube does, and it also has other revenue generation programs.

        Projects tend to be very small, and the whole thing could be probably better handled by imposing a limit on the size.
        But i've seen a couple projects purporting to relate to video processing packages that had entire movies as test data.
        These disappeared pretty quickly, suggesting the "test data" (porn) was the purpose all along.

  • just use
    svn checkout enter-url-here
    It's how I download everything from google code, and for github I use git. or is the command line "too ancient" to use anymore?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Because end users don't have SVN?

      • Because end users don't have SVN?

        Distributing software to end users isn't a core purpose of Google Code; the download functionality (which could be, and often was, used for that purpose) wasn't, as I understand it, provided for that purpose, but provided mostly as an alternative to using source control tools to get source code bundles.

        But, using it to distribute arbitrary files also enabled to it to be used to create Google Code projects that were nothing but free hosting for malware distributed via decepti

        • by EvanED (569694)

          Distributing software to end users isn't a core purpose of Google Code; the download functionality (which could be, and often was, used for that purpose) wasn't, as I understand it, provided for that purpose, but provided mostly as an alternative to using source control tools to get source code bundles.

          It's possible that's what they were thinking (and maybe even said) but it sure doesn't come out from the design of the site, which I've always thought has been well-geared toward the end users. There's a cons

          • It's possible that's what they were thinking (and maybe even said) but it sure doesn't come out from the design of the site, which I've always thought has been well-geared toward the end users.

            I think that the goal was to be well-geared toward full-featured developer collaboration (which involves more than just hosting repositories.) The fact that the same features can be leveraged with user-focussed content to also make it an excellent platform for end-user interaction was, I think, a peripheral benefit.

    • by Todd Knarr (15451) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:25PM (#43806685) Homepage

      Because the average user doesn't want the source code, they want to download a prepared binary in an installer or zipfile?

  • by SuperBanana (662181) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:21PM (#43806647)

    My MOM knows what BitTorrent is. It's available on nearly every platform in existence; there's even a javascript client, I think? Some browsers now have clients built-in or available via extensions. With DHT supported by most every client, you don't even need a tracker. Web seeding means you don't have to guarantee seeded peers if you've got some HTTP mirror available somewhere.

    So, can FOSS projects please grow up and start using bittorrent more? Can we make torrents a little more transparent to users, as well? As in, you click a link and you don't need to do anything else, no external programs, etc? Some big projects like Libreoffice have been using BitTorrent for a while; distributions have been as well even longer.

    PS:For the love of god, please pick a sensible chunk size *glares at people who create 300MB torrents with 4MB chunk sizes*

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:40PM (#43806857)

    Remember when it was normal to move files around with standard protocols, which worked reliably and didn't require any bizarre shit? And then remember when someone came up with a great idea of offering file storage service, with the caveat that you would have to use weird special software in order to upload and download your files, so that we could move toward a situation where it's not always necessarily available (e.g., if the weird software hasn't been ported to your box yet) not as easily scriptable, and just didn't work as well?

    People, when that happened, you were supposed to laugh in Dropbox's face, slapping your knee while between chuckles you weakly uttered "oh my god, what a stupid idea! And how insulting for you to think we're stupid enough to fall for it!"

    That's what you were supposed to say. Instead, it seems that a bunch of people said, "oh, cooool!!!" instead.

    So of course Google had to go make Google Drive, to catch up on being as horrible as Dropbox, so that Dropbox wouldn't get the whole market of stupid people. Stupid people are a valuable market.

    But once they had to deal with stupid people and not-stupid people, they had a problem: wouldn't it be more profitable, if we could get non-stupid people to do things The Stupid Way? You know, run our "drive" software instead of rsync, sftp, etc?

    So here we are. Thanks, everyone. Thanks for making these fucking weird nonstandard clients the new norm that everyone is expected to put up with. I just realized something: you all didn't really hate AOL, did you? It stopped being "cool" (?!) but you never understood why it wasn't cool, huh?

    • by game kid (805301)

      Truth, all of that, of course.

      My favorite part is where everyone here's modding down the wise posts as Trolls. But 'ey, if y'all prefer Facebook 2: +ElectricBoogaloo over federation and XMPP, and ridiculous "abuse" excuses over sensible free software download systems, then I don't have all the time in the world to try to steer the USS Consensus closer to the HMS Sense.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Dropbox has a REST API you can use to upload, via standard HTTP, and a website you can use to do the same thing if you're so much of a tard that you can't write a little bit of code.

    • by sirsnork (530512)

      Yup, because before dropbox there was a simple and effective rsync client for windows that could and would work to keep some folders in sync across all your computers and be publicly available without needing to setup your own server. All for free

      Except there wasn't.

    • by Linzer (753270)

      Remember when it was normal to move files around with standard protocols, which worked reliably and didn't require any bizarre shit?

      Ooh, that does ring a bell. There was this protocol for transfering files, what was it called again? Started with F... something something. Would be completely useless today, I'm sure, now that we have Google Drive...

  • by hazem (472289) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:43PM (#43806877) Journal

    The last times I tried using Google Drive, if you downloaded more than one file, it would make a zip file with the files where the dates were all reset to Jan-1-1980. Does it still do that?

    That's a deal-killer to me and makes the service unusable. DropBox doesn't do that - so I know it's not technically impossible to so something so difficult as preserve a file's modify-time.

    • by MAXOMENOS (9802)
      So, I just downloaded some class notes from Google Drive as MS Word documents, and the dates look correct. I think the answer is yes, they did fix the bug. I did this on Windows 7.
  • by gerddie (173963) on Thursday May 23, 2013 @04:49PM (#43806935)
    well, thank the FSM that I never moved away from sourceforge. I migrated from CVS to SVN, now I moved to GIT, and their new Allura interface is quite nice. The only thing that I'm missing in the bug tracker is a way to properly define dependencies between bugs.
  • Quoting the comments:

    Roberto Galoppini May 23, 2013 at 12:40 PM

    SourceForge welcomes Google Code open source developers, to distribute downloads from our open source platform.

    We serve over 150 Million+ downloads each month, reaching 42 Million+ unique visitors. We help tiny projects as well as whales like Apache OpenOffice to distribute their downloads via our worldwide mirror network.

    By distributing your releases at SourceForge you’ll get a complete download analytics, and the opportunity to tap into a large open source community. We already serve other ecosystems by offering their hosted projects our download facilities, including Githubbers.

    As a trusted partner for open source we're glad to help. https://sourceforge.net/publish/?source=googlecode [sourceforge.net]

    [Disclosure: I work for SourceForge]

    Setup looks pretty simple; but, since I don't have code in Google Code, I can't put it to the test. Can anyone attest to how well this works?

  • I know it fell out of favor for new projects when Google Code / CodePlex / GitHub came on the scene with their Web 2.0 design hotness and minimalistic feature sets, but SourceForge [sf.net] is still around and continues to improve without taking any features away.
  • Google taketh away.

  • A few hours ago, I was just thinking this might happen someday, and wondering if I should use sourceforge for the downloads of my next software releases in the coming days. Never thought that someday might be today!
  • Effective immediately, existing projects that offer no downloads and all new projects will no longer be able to create downloads.

    This sentence doesn't parse.

    • by Aighearach (97333)

      Effective immediately, existing projects that offer no downloads and all new projects will no longer be able to create downloads.

      This sentence doesn't parse.

      That is because you have a defective parser. I recommend remedial studies.

  • I'm pretty sure lots of proyects will be moving to github/bitbucket/etc now!

  • -1 for end user experience for getting code. At least, google code should still include a tab called downloads for links to whereever else for each download. That will minimize end-user-of-software (as in non-developer) confusion. Oh and I would also like to extend my personal invitation to all the MFs who abused the service with malware to please leave the planet as soon as possible. Remember, suicide is always an option to a worthless, counterproductive life.
  • Google Drive is recommended as an alternative

    Or, you know, FTP.

The world is moving so fast these days that the man who says it can't be done is generally interrupted by someone doing it. -- E. Hubbard

Working...