Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
Le Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 06:24:38PM +0100, gregor herrmann a écrit : [I'm still a bit confused by the need to second a URL, but FWIW:] This proposal is fine with me, so: seconded. Thank you Gregor for all your comments. For the URL, I may have been a bit formal, but I wanted to be sure of a consensus before bothering further the WWW team (http://bugs.debian.org/649811) or the Lintian maintainers (http://bugs.debian.org/649813). Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:33:57 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 04:58:37PM -0400, David Prévot a écrit : Le 22/10/2011 10:57, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:27:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : So I propose to do the following, in line with the other propositions. a) Apply the attached patch to point at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the spec. I overlooked README.org, which was missing from the patch. Here is an updated one. Comments or seconds are welcome. Seconded, thanks for working on that. one more developer seconding the use of the above URL, that is, expressing not only his own approbation but also his feeling that it reflects a broad consensus, and we can close the issue. [I'm still a bit confused by the need to second a URL, but FWIW:] This proposal is fine with me, so: seconded. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key ID: 0x8649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe `-NP: Sting: Roxanne signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
Le Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 04:58:37PM -0400, David Prévot a écrit : Hi, Le 22/10/2011 10:57, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:27:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : So I propose to do the following, in line with the other propositions. a) Apply the attached patch to point at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the spec. I overlooked README.org, which was missing from the patch. Here is an updated one. Comments or seconds are welcome. Seconded, thanks for working on that. Dear all, one more developer seconding the use of the above URL, that is, expressing not only his own approbation but also his feeling that it reflects a broad consensus, and we can close the issue. If there are worries that this URL is not consensual, it would be very welcome to express them as well. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
Hi, Le 22/10/2011 10:57, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:27:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : So I propose to do the following, in line with the other propositions. a) Apply the attached patch to point at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the spec. I overlooked README.org, which was missing from the patch. Here is an updated one. Comments or seconds are welcome. Seconded, thanks for working on that. Regards David signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
Le Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:27:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : So I propose to do the following, in line with the other propositions. a) Apply the attached patch to point at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the spec. I overlooked README.org, which was missing from the patch. Here is an updated one. Comments or seconds are welcome. Have a nice week-end, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan From d728555325894ac6062aa8348458416900edc98c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 22:22:22 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] Use http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ as URI. --- README.org|2 +- copyright-format/copyright-format.xml |8 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/README.org b/README.org index b2c4b6f..2be9c51 100644 --- a/README.org +++ b/README.org @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ published at [[http://www.debian.org/doc/]]. In addition to the main technical manual, the team currently also maintains: -+ [[http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0][Machine-readable debian/copyright format]] ++ [[http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/][Machine-readable debian/copyright format]] + [[http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu-policy/][Debian Menu sub-policy]] + [[http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/perl-policy/][Debian Perl Policy]] + [[http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/mime-policy/][Debian MIME support sub-policy]] diff --git a/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml b/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml index d6790aa..c4e47b3 100644 --- a/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml +++ b/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml @@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ titlevarnameFormat/varname/title para Required single line: URI of the format specification, such as: - literalhttp://www.debian.org/doc/copyright-format/1.0/literal + literalhttp://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0//literal /para /section @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ section id=example-header-paragraph titleExample header paragraph/title -programlistingFormat: lt;VERSIONED_FORMAT_URLgt; +programlistingFormat: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/; Upstream-Name: SOFTware Upstream-Contact: John Doe lt;john@example.comgt; Source: http://www.example.com/software/project/programlisting @@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@ also delete it here./programlisting A possible filenamedebian/copyright/filename file for the program quoteX Solitaire/quote distributed in the Debian source package literalxsol/literal: -programlisting![CDATA[Format: VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL +programlisting![CDATA[Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ Upstream-Name: X Solitaire Source: ftp://ftp.example.com/pub/games @@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ License: A possible filenamedebian/copyright/filename file for the program quotePlanet Venus/quote, distributed in the Debian source package literalplanet-venus/literal: -programlisting![CDATA[Format: VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL +programlisting![CDATA[Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ Upstream-Name: Planet Venus Upstream-Contact: John Doe j...@example.com Source: http://www.example.com/code/venus -- 1.7.5.4
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
Le Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:32:43AM +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit : On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:27:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: c) Distribute the versionned and unversionned HTML and text builds in the debian-policy binary package. (Assuming that if since nobody proposed to stop distributing the unversionned build, it is that people want it to stay). I am missing the disctinction between versionned and unversionned build. What would be the purpose of the unversionned build ? We are currently distributing the draft for 1.0 without a version number. After 1.0 is published, this unversionned file will be the draft for 1.1 or 2.0. We can either continue to distribute its html and txt builds, or stop doing so. I am fine with either. If everybody is undecided, I propose to stop distributing builds of the draft of the next version in the debian-policy binary package, after version 1.0 published. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:27:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: tag 640737 + patch thanks Dear all, to summarise: * http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/version/ will allow the copyright-format specification to become a multi-page HTML document if it gets significantly expanded, but on the other hand, somebody downloading the current one-page spec will get a file called ‘index.html’. * Rebuilding the distributed document at each upload may cause it to change in layout or in checksum, but on the other hand ensures that it is continuously buildable. My point of view is that the copyright-format specification is not likely to be enlarged to the point of neeeding to separate its chapters in different files (there is SPDX…) and that the source document uses only simple DocBook 4.5 tags which makes it very unlikely to become unbuildable with the default XSL stylesheet it uses. Moreover, I am biased by the culture in my profession to not change even a single comma of a published work, so my personnal preference would have been to distribute files like copyright-format-1.0.html, committed with their source in the debian-policy Git repository. This said, this point of view had no support from other participants in this discussion. So I propose to do the following, in line with the other propositions. a) Apply the attached patch to point at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the spec. Fine with me. b) When the 1.0 version is finalised, (re)build at each upload copyright-format/copyright-format.xml, copyright-format/copyright-format-1.0.xml, and so on for the future revisions. c) Distribute the versionned and unversionned HTML and text builds in the debian-policy binary package. (Assuming that if since nobody proposed to stop distributing the unversionned build, it is that people want it to stay). I am missing the disctinction between versionned and unversionned build. What would be the purpose of the unversionned build ? I will propose a patch to implement the building and distribution of released versions and current draft, but before doing so, I would like to know if it would be acceptable to have them in /usr/share/doc/debian-policy, or if the published versions should be in a separate directory. I think it is fine to put them in /usr/share/doc/debian-policy, or in a subdirectory, as the need arise. Cheers, Bill. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org
tag 640737 + patch thanks Dear all, to summarise: * http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/version/ will allow the copyright-format specification to become a multi-page HTML document if it gets significantly expanded, but on the other hand, somebody downloading the current one-page spec will get a file called ‘index.html’. * Rebuilding the distributed document at each upload may cause it to change in layout or in checksum, but on the other hand ensures that it is continuously buildable. My point of view is that the copyright-format specification is not likely to be enlarged to the point of neeeding to separate its chapters in different files (there is SPDX…) and that the source document uses only simple DocBook 4.5 tags which makes it very unlikely to become unbuildable with the default XSL stylesheet it uses. Moreover, I am biased by the culture in my profession to not change even a single comma of a published work, so my personnal preference would have been to distribute files like copyright-format-1.0.html, committed with their source in the debian-policy Git repository. This said, this point of view had no support from other participants in this discussion. So I propose to do the following, in line with the other propositions. a) Apply the attached patch to point at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ in the spec. b) When the 1.0 version is finalised, (re)build at each upload copyright-format/copyright-format.xml, copyright-format/copyright-format-1.0.xml, and so on for the future revisions. c) Distribute the versionned and unversionned HTML and text builds in the debian-policy binary package. (Assuming that if since nobody proposed to stop distributing the unversionned build, it is that people want it to stay). I will propose a patch to implement the building and distribution of released versions and current draft, but before doing so, I would like to know if it would be acceptable to have them in /usr/share/doc/debian-policy, or if the published versions should be in a separate directory. Have a nice day, -- Charles From f1458e166554bcb1928e7d74e54af5ea873d8dc4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 22:22:22 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] Use http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ as URI. --- copyright-format/copyright-format.xml |8 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml b/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml index d6790aa..c4e47b3 100644 --- a/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml +++ b/copyright-format/copyright-format.xml @@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ titlevarnameFormat/varname/title para Required single line: URI of the format specification, such as: - literalhttp://www.debian.org/doc/copyright-format/1.0/literal + literalhttp://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0//literal /para /section @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ section id=example-header-paragraph titleExample header paragraph/title -programlistingFormat: lt;VERSIONED_FORMAT_URLgt; +programlistingFormat: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/; Upstream-Name: SOFTware Upstream-Contact: John Doe lt;john@example.comgt; Source: http://www.example.com/software/project/programlisting @@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@ also delete it here./programlisting A possible filenamedebian/copyright/filename file for the program quoteX Solitaire/quote distributed in the Debian source package literalxsol/literal: -programlisting![CDATA[Format: VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL +programlisting![CDATA[Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ Upstream-Name: X Solitaire Source: ftp://ftp.example.com/pub/games @@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ License: A possible filenamedebian/copyright/filename file for the program quotePlanet Venus/quote, distributed in the Debian source package literalplanet-venus/literal: -programlisting![CDATA[Format: VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL +programlisting![CDATA[Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ Upstream-Name: Planet Venus Upstream-Contact: John Doe j...@example.com Source: http://www.example.com/code/venus -- 1.7.5.4
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org (Re: Bug#640737: [copyright-format] misc. changes from driver.)
Le Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 02:07:52PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : David Prévot taf...@debian.org writes: I don't now what is the supposed name of the DEP5 document inside the debian-policy package, but it would be highly appreciated if the “1.0” part could be easily parsable from the document name, at worse from the document itself (in a reliable way). We should be able to do that. Another side issue: in a few years, after some updates of the copyright-format policy (e.g. version 4.2), it will be a bit painful to rebuild the website from scratch, since one will have to dig up old debian-policy packages in order to retrieve all copyright-format versions… I'm moderately tempted to just keep all the old versions in the debian-policy package to solve that problem. It would mean that any build system issues would have to be done across all the old versions of the document we have available, but it seems worth it to have stable URLs. Dear all, Here is one simple solution: - In the debian-policy package, copyright-format/copyright-format.xml is the working document, which contains a disclaimer and a reference to the stable version on www.debian.org. - Published versions are stored in the debian-policy in copyright-format/published/, as XML source and HTML and text documents, without makefile as they are final versions, under names like copyright-format/published/copyright-format-1.0.html. - The ‘7doc’ cron job on www.debian.org installs a hard-coded list of copyright-format versions, on URIs like ‘http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format-1.0.html’ Depending how often the spec is updated (hopefully not often), the file listing in http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/ will grow, but if it really becomes a problem, the directory could get a proper WML index. - Thanks to content negociation on www.debian.org, the current URI for the spec would be http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format-1.0 Just let me know if you would like patches. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org (Re: Bug#640737: [copyright-format] misc. changes from driver.)
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: Here is one simple solution: - In the debian-policy package, copyright-format/copyright-format.xml is the working document, which contains a disclaimer and a reference to the stable version on www.debian.org. - Published versions are stored in the debian-policy in copyright-format/published/, as XML source and HTML and text documents, without makefile as they are final versions, under names like copyright-format/published/copyright-format-1.0.html. I think we should include the source in case anyone wants to fork an old version of the document (plus just on general principles of always retaining source for anything we publish), and if we're going to include the source we should ensure it remains buildable, so my inclination is to only include the source in the Git repository for debian-policy and keep generating the HTML for old versions. This requires changing the documents if anything about the toolchain for generating HTML changes, but hopefully such changes should be minor. - The ‘7doc’ cron job on www.debian.org installs a hard-coded list of copyright-format versions, on URIs like ‘http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format-1.0.html’ Depending how often the spec is updated (hopefully not often), the file listing in http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/ will grow, but if it really becomes a problem, the directory could get a proper WML index. - Thanks to content negociation on www.debian.org, the current URI for the spec would be http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format-1.0 The advantage of instead using: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ is that, when one is using a simple mapping from URLs to file space, if for some reason the document ever needs to be broken into multiple files or needs to have images, the URL already assumes each document is in its own directory and keeps all those supporting files isolated from each other for multiple versions. There are, of course, ways of arranging this for any URL format, but this one probably keeps the overall complexity down the most. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org (Re: Bug#640737: [copyright-format] misc. changes from driver.)
Le Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 05:45:02PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: - Published versions are stored in the debian-policy in copyright-format/published/, as XML source and HTML and text documents, without makefile as they are final versions, under names like copyright-format/published/copyright-format-1.0.html. I think we should include the source Yes, this is what I have written, modulo the Makefile. I think that there is an advantage to not rebuild the HTML and TXT versions, as this guarantees that the distrubuted documents on www.debian.org will stay bit-identical. The HTML version is currently built using jade, but this is because I have been conservative and took the same mechanism as for the Debconf spec. It is trivially buildable with xsltproc on a standard Debian system as the DocBook source indicates its stylesheet. The TXT is built by converting HTML to text with the links browser. We can of course include a Makefile and make sure that the published versions are always rebuildable, but if jade and links change tiny details in the way they convert documents (whitespace,…), I think that it would not be a good reason to change the MD5 sum of the published versions. - Thanks to content negociation on www.debian.org, the current URI for the spec would be http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format-1.0 The advantage of instead using: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ is that, when one is using a simple mapping from URLs to file space, if for some reason the document ever needs to be broken into multiple files or needs to have images, the URL already assumes each document is in its own directory and keeps all those supporting files isolated from each other for multiple versions. I proposed copyright-format-1.0 because it seemed to fit better David's requirements, as for the URI you propose the file name of the spec would be ‘index.html’. For both URIs it looks equally easy to install the files. I will follow the WWW team's choice for sure. Cheers, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org (Re: Bug#640737: [copyright-format] misc. changes from driver.)
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: Le Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 05:45:02PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: - Published versions are stored in the debian-policy in copyright-format/published/, as XML source and HTML and text documents, without makefile as they are final versions, under names like copyright-format/published/copyright-format-1.0.html. I think we should include the source Yes, this is what I have written, modulo the Makefile. Yes, I know. That's just part of the overall context for my whole response which is now snipped out of that context. :) I think that there is an advantage to not rebuild the HTML and TXT versions, as this guarantees that the distrubuted documents on www.debian.org will stay bit-identical. I think ensuring rebuildability is somewhat more important than this. We can of course include a Makefile and make sure that the published versions are always rebuildable, but if jade and links change tiny details in the way they convert documents (whitespace,…), I think that it would not be a good reason to change the MD5 sum of the published versions. I guess that doesn't really bother me. The advantage of instead using: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ is that, when one is using a simple mapping from URLs to file space, if for some reason the document ever needs to be broken into multiple files or needs to have images, the URL already assumes each document is in its own directory and keeps all those supporting files isolated from each other for multiple versions. I proposed copyright-format-1.0 because it seemed to fit better David's requirements, as for the URI you propose the file name of the spec would be ‘index.html’. For both URIs it looks equally easy to install the files. I will follow the WWW team's choice for sure. My assumption was that we would (for right now in the absence of needing any supporting files) generate a single HTML file named copyright-format-1.0.html, which the web team would then copy as index.html into a directory named after the version number. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#640737: [copyright-format] Format URL and installation on www.debian.org (Re: Bug#640737: [copyright-format] misc. changes from driver.)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, Le 27/09/2011 21:17, Russ Allbery a écrit : Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: Le Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 05:45:02PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : The advantage of instead using: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ is that, when one is using a simple mapping from URLs to file space, if for some reason the document ever needs to be broken into multiple files or needs to have images, the URL already assumes each document is in its own directory and keeps all those supporting files isolated from each other for multiple versions. Good point. I proposed copyright-format-1.0 because it seemed to fit better David's requirements, as for the URI you propose the file name of the spec would be ‘index.html’. For both URIs it looks equally easy to install the files. I will follow the WWW team's choice for sure. My assumption was that we would (for right now in the absence of needing any supporting files) generate a single HTML file named copyright-format-1.0.html, which the web team would then copy as index.html into a directory named after the version number. Thanks Russ, such a name (copyright-format-version.html) would totally fit the (maybe badly expressed, sorry if I confused you, Charles) requirements I could think of, to publish the current version of the copyright-format policy, keeping the www build simple. Regards David -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJOgoQ/AAoJELgqIXr9/gnyx9kP/jabaJznAj4ZLLcC7o5I8Vuw EuiCtKTPGayAotGkbmK/3rG62gvpkg6+odJWEadLE61qmVtbavSIs+qX3eqo85cs BMckTHTYyFdmWszeaWUaYmHboKAv0e7xrpnkDhJFtM0vDQg1mdXPbpcMT3HESMpM 5DR2zTrZ4JnVbQwjParVidp9G3+C2H+/fKyPxfTh74xIzkol69HGUPcajM4gjXwr O8UWPnFW5d/irN76cApJLZ73rahBigARVtpTLsF74n21SB8+vvC1DS+UjMk8Jwyo 88Rs8fvKEfHHmyB1AYWPFohvEJZ79O8Ppva8rzMOTRp+3gKCSfRtQXAO6FGKA3xi 8wMvfyYXy1N7dQFzDjGKlNqhE+bmjMCBiZlPMDp3555K+spfb65rntpPtmRrU2N4 xaozHE8u2wNbTZqFZYr95EcszRPwmyLAdSe9W3nDfp+3rxrntPYQBn+TOqEZL8Bo eYHo6aLSVdP22X9x6d3mdG5XALgMKh+CRKV+X4tMg4uQS5wEczz5y7jOVkgGLylU NUQYchIow1C7JOqngYjLPYjZdp9hWRB2ujLfWyYQvifVonVbnITbTvas048oUF25 xKccQDTIBB3G037apthSKECh5gzo20xI6ejH8AArpDIMn1Ke6nC//ia9gbyV//CA fuGJBbpwIkVg6lzsKBni =D6bO -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
