Re: Is Debian OS FIPS Certified?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear Milica,

I believe your question should be best addressed to the debian-security
mailing list, as you might find  security experts there, rather than to
this mailing list (debian-doc). Nevertheless, I will try to answer you to
the best of my ability.

On Mon, 19 Sept 2022 at 11:28, Milica Mijatovic <
milica.mijato...@sbgenomics.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is Debian OS FIPS certified? Does it support FIPS Validated Cryptographic
> Modules?
>

It would be best if you clarified to which specific FIPS certification you
refer to. There are multiple FIPS standards (see
https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips). Are you referring to FIPS 140-2
or 140-3? (Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules). If this is the
case, the elements to be certified in these standards are specific
cryptographic modules, not the operating system itself.

For security operating system certifications, the market uses the Common
Criteria standard. This standard has developed a specific "Protection
Profile" for general purpose operating systems. It is worthwhile noting
that Debian GNU/Linux, as an operating system, is not Common Criteria
certified. This is not because the Debian OS does not fulfill the
requirements for certification but, rather, because certification is a
heavy process that requires the engagement of a certification lab and an
entity paying for the whole process. Debian, as a project, has not seen the
need in the past to go through these types of security certifications.
Commercial companies (such as Red Hat, Ubuntu or IBM/SUSE) have undergone
the costly certification process, that is why their operating systems are
listed in the Common Criteria product pages (see
https://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/products/)



> What I noticed is that FIPS mode can be enabled with the tool
> fips-mode-setup
> .
> This tool is developed and can be used for other Linux distributions (SUSE,
> Oracle Linux, RedHat, Ubuntu), in case the user wants to enable FIPS mode
> afterwards (not part of OS). Does that mean that Debian can be configured
> to use FIPS Validated Cryptographic Modules?
>

Debian can be indeed be configured, as other distributions, with FIPS to
enable the cryptographic module self-checks mandated by the Federal
Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2. However, you need to be aware
that the distribution itself has not been tested / certified to be in
compliance with the FIPS 1402- standard. This does not mean that it does
not comply, it just means that no attempts have been done to test/certify
the Debian OS in specific configuration.

Hope the above information is helpful.

Javier

Re: Debian history Debian 10

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear colleague,

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 02:33, "세벌"  wrote:

> Hello, I'm a Korean and a Debian user.
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/project-history/-/blob/master/po4a/po/ko.po
> (and other *.po files, too)
> says Debian 10 Buster (no release date yet):
> But
> https://www.debian.org/News/2019/20190706.en.html
> says Debian 10 buster released
> So I think that
> https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/project-history/-/blob/master/po4a/po/*.po
> files must be updated
>

The debian-history package has been uploaded hopefully fixing this (and
other) bugs. The changes should be shown in the Debian web site in some
hours, they are already available in Salsa.debian.org. Please note,
however, that the Korean translation will need to be updated accordingly.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Fwd: "A Brief History of Debian: Chapter 2 - Leadership" online page needs some update

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 00:19, Holger Wansing  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Javier Fernandez-Sanguino  wrote:
> > Hi Holger,
> >
> > On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 16:46, Holger Wansing 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Now that we have the latest debian-history package version on the
> webpage,
> > > we need an upload to get latest git into the archive :-)
> > >
> > > Any volunteers?
> > > Or someone, who wants to grant me with per-package upload rights for
> > > debian-history?
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for taking care of this. I have a few changes to do to this
> package.
> > I will prioritise them and make an upload as early as possible.
> > Nevertheless, if you want to do it earlier and beat me to it please go
> > ahead.
>
> To make this clear:
>
> I am not a DD with upload rights, only a DM.
>

Apologies, I was not aware.

In any case, I have just uploaded a few hours ago a new version of
project-history, also fixing some bugs which were pending in the BTS.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Fwd: "A Brief History of Debian: Chapter 2 - Leadership" online page needs some update

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hi Holger,

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 16:46, Holger Wansing  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Now that we have the latest debian-history package version on the webpage,
> we need an upload to get latest git into the archive :-)
>
> Any volunteers?
> Or someone, who wants to grant me with per-package upload rights for
> debian-history?
>

Thanks for taking care of this. I have a few changes to do to this package.
I will prioritise them and make an upload as early as possible.
Nevertheless, if you want to do it earlier and beat me to it please go
ahead.

Best regards

Javier

Release-notes: Japanese translation broken build (was: ddp build failed)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear Hideki Yamane,

Based on the build logs below it looks like the Japanese translation of the
release notes does not build. Could you please take a look?

Thanks!

Javier

-- Forwarded message -
De: Debian Webmaster 
Date: lun., 22 jul. 2019 7:27
Subject: ddp build failed
To: 


/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-po4a-translate -o
nodefault=' 
  ' -o translated=' 
WW
' -o inline=' ' --format docbook
--keep 0 --master en/issues.dbk --po ja/issues.po --localized ja/issues.dbk
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-po4a-translate -o
nodefault=' 
  ' -o translated=' 
WW
' -o inline=' ' --format docbook
--keep 0 --master en/whats-new.dbk --po ja/whats-new.po --localized
ja/whats-new.dbk
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-po4a-translate -o
nodefault=' 
  ' -o translated=' 
WW
' -o inline=' ' --format docbook
--keep 0 --master en/about.dbk --po ja/about.po --localized ja/about.dbk
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-xsltproc --nonet --novalid
--xinclude --stringparam draft.mode maybe --stringparam profile.arch
"amd64;not-arm64;not-armel;not-armhf;not-i386;not-mips;not-mips64el;not-mipsel;not-ppc64el;not-s390x;linux"
\
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-  --stringparam
profile.condition ";;g-i" \
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/profiling/profile.xsl
ja/release-notes.dbk | xsltproc --nonet --novalid --xinclude --stringparam
draft.mode maybe /srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/release-notes/preproc.xsl
- > ja/release-notes.amd64.xml
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-ja/whats-new.dbk:542: parser
error : Opening and ending tag mismatch: ulink line 541 and systemitem
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-url="cryptsetup">cryptsetup
マニュアルページをご
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-
 ^
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-ja/release-notes.dbk:60:
element include: XInclude error : could not load ja/whats-new.dbk, and no
fallback was found
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log--:1: parser error : Document is
empty
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-^
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-unable to parse -
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-Makefile:280: recipe for target
'ja/release-notes.amd64.xml' failed
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log:make[2]
: ***
[ja/release-notes.amd64.xml] Error 6
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-make[2]
: Leaving
directory '/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/release-notes'
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-make[2]
: Entering
directory '/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/release-notes'
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-po4a-translate -o
nodefault=' 
  ' -o translated=' 
WW
' -o inline=' ' --format docbook
--keep 0 --master en/old-stuff.dbk --po nl/old-stuff.po --localized
nl/old-stuff.dbk
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-po4a-translate -o
nodefault=' 
  ' -o translated=' 
WW
' -o inline=' ' --format docbook
--keep 0 --master en/release-notes.dbk --po nl/release-notes.po --localized
nl/release-notes.dbk
--
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-Writing index.it.html for book
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-make[2]
: Leaving
directory '/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/release-notes'
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-make[2]
: Entering
directory '/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/release-notes'
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-xsltproc --nonet --novalid
--xinclude --stringparam draft.mode maybe --stringparam profile.arch
"arm64;not-amd64;not-armel;not-armhf;not-i386;not-mips;not-mips64el;not-mipsel;not-ppc64el;not-s390x;linux"
\
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-  --stringparam
profile.condition ";" \
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/profiling/profile.xsl
ja/release-notes.dbk | xsltproc --nonet --novalid --xinclude --stringparam
draft.mode maybe /srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/release-notes/preproc.xsl
- > ja/release-notes.arm64.xml
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-ja/whats-new.dbk:542: parser
error : Opening and ending tag mismatch: ulink line 541 and systemitem
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-url="cryptsetup">cryptsetup
マニュアルページをご
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-
 ^
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log-ja/release-notes.dbk:60:
element include: XInclude error : could not load ja/whats-new.dbk, and no
fallback was found
/srv/www.debian.org/release-notes/build.log--:1: parser error : Document is
empty

Re: BYHAND rules for debian-faq / Re: Bug#612993: Converted debian-faq to DocBook

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 06:55, Joost van Baal-Ilić <
joostvb-debian-faq-2017113...@mdcc.cx> wrote:

> > The only place where the BYHAND rules might still be needed is from the
> > fileservers (https://deb.debian.org/debian/doc/FAQ),
>
> Yes, afaik that's indeed what they're used for.
>

Correct, this is where they are used.


>
> > and I think that
> > nowadays the availability on the main website should suffice.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> https://deb.debian.org/debian/doc/ also has documents we ship with the
> doc-debian package (social-contract, constitution, bug-reporting etc.)
> _If_ we
> choose to no longer ship the FAQ via the mirrors, we might also want to
> discuss
> what to do with these other documents.
>

Also relevant is that the documents from the mirror are used in the
DVD/CD/Blu-ray images. I would rather continue shiping the FAQ via the
mirrors.

This currently means using BYHAND rules, but maybe ftp-master can propose
an alternative mechanism to sync the contents to that directory? (there
could be a regular task to pull the information from the package or to pull
from the web).

I personally like our mirrors to be somewhat self-contained by shipping
> not just software but also some instructions.
>

I agreed with the above. Specially considering that some may receive this
content not via the mirrors network but via the media we prepare/distribute
with each release.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Could somebody look at the discussion at merge 5

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 10:08, Emmanuel Bourg  wrote:

> I observe though that Sylvestre Ledru edited the FAQ in 2013, and I'm
> not sure the changes were propagated to the DDP repository. If the
> contents diverged it would be nice to reconcile them first before doing
> more changes.
>

Thanks for spotting, I will take a look at it this week and try to
reconcile these changes.

Best regards

Javier

Re: there is missing info. in debian releases .

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 23:56, shirish शिरीष  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I have been looking at the Debian releases wiki page over the last
> several days and it seems lot of pages have the same missing content -
>

The canonical content on Releases is available here:
https://www.debian.org/releases/

So, for stable, it is: https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/  (but you
can also use the codenames: https://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/)

A summary of all the releases in Debian is also available in the Project
History document:
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/project-history/ch-releases.en.html

 An example to share could be https://wiki.debian.org/DebianJessie

>
> Just a cursory look tells me that the page can be improved in number of
> ways -
>

Maybe the best is, as you say, to have a template (


> a. It doesn't tell about the release name and version before Jessie
> came into being. If memory serves right, that was wheezy.
>

This is because this information is captured in the above web pages and, in
the Wiki, in the following summary: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases

 b. It doesn't tell the distribution version release which superseded

> it . This I know is Stretch.
>

Again, this is in the general summary.


> c. Most importantly though, it doesn't tell what the lifecycle of a
> certain version is . That info. is available only in the LTS page
> https://wiki.debian.org/LTS


The lifecycle is not set in stone, but, again, this is in the general
summary page in the Wiki


> Now while I don't know the how these wiki pages are made,  if the
> release page use a certain template then we should modify that
> template and also include the missing information at least till wheezy
>

I believe all the releases use the same Wiki template already or at least
it looks that way. Granted, they could have more information, but there is
so much benefit in repeating information that is also available in other
(higher level) views of the Debian Release cycle.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Could somebody look at the discussion at merge 5

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hi,



El mié., 5 sept. 2018 1:22, Emmanuel Bourg  escribió:

> Le 04/09/2018 à 12:57, Osamu Aoki a écrit :
>
> > This is merged to master with fix to your changes and updated build
> > script.  I think you should close merge request ... I don't know how.
>
> The FAQ in the java-policy repository hasn't been updated though. I'm a
> bit confused, do we have two versions of the Java FAQ in different
> repositories? Which one was more recent before shirish changes?
>


As mentioned previously in the thread related to this document the
authoritative location is this one:
https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq

That is where all the document history is (migrated from the former DDP
SVN).

Java-policy contains a *copy* of the document and does not have the commit
history.

Best regards

Javier

>

Re: debian-java-faq seems to be pretty old -

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hi there,

El vie., 31 ago. 2018 19:03, Markus Koschany  escribió:

> Hello,
>
> Am 31.08.2018 um 18:27 schrieb shirish शिरीष:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I was reading
> >
> > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/
> >
> > and it seems the manual is pretty old and seems to have lot of oudated
> info.
>
> [...]
>

It is mentioned already in the website that some content might be outdated.
However we should probably change that to *is* outdated.

>
> I agree that a lot of the information at
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ is outdated.


I agree too as I wrote most of the content a long time ago (18 years!).

This is
> partly because the people who created the old Debian Java FAQ are no
> longer involved in Debian Java or may even have reassigned from Debian
> completely.


This is actually because I am not actively updating it myself anymore (last
update I did was 4 years ago) and nobody has stepped in to support the
document. But it would be great if somebody did.

Note that I was never part of the Java team. Just a DD that wanted to
support users in getting help others on how to run Java in their systems by
documenting it.

It is also more difficult to update the old Debian Java FAQ
> instead of updating our Wiki.


I will not argue much this point, but this is something I do not agree with
too much, specially with the move to Salsa.

There is some advantages to having a good document for end users (e.g.
printable,
easily translatable, off line copy in java-common)

Hence I suggest the following to you:
>

Why doesn't the Java team actually review the Java FAQ and let DDP know if
it should be kept or dropped completely? (In the latter we should remove it
from the web listing and remove it from java-common).

If kept, the FAQ could have a disclaimer that the document *might* not be
updated and point to the WiKi page for reference (if one exists).

>
> If you would like to help us, you could create a new Wiki page, e.g.
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/Java/FAQ
>
> Add those questions and answers to the page that you find interesting
> and either update them yourself or mark them as "update needed". Then
> let's work together on improving the information.
>

If this is done please also let DDP know to remove the document and add a
disclaimer in the GIT instead. Otherwise we will end up with contradicting
sources of information which is not very helpful to our users.

Best regards

Javier

>

Re: DDP group on salsa.d.o? (was: Move refcard to salsa?)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 12 May 2018 at 17:28, W. Martin Borgert <deba...@debian.org> wrote:

> On 2018-05-12 16:02, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote:
> > It feels like we are not organising ourselves sufficiently. Is there any
> > way we can move the DDP (project) into the ddp-team (group)?
> > I only see an option to create a new project and I rather not duplicate
> the
> > work I did yesterday if it can be avoided.
>
> You can just move the debian/ddp.git repo to the new ddp-team namespace:
> Go to https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ddp/edit
> then General project settings
> then Advanced settings
> then Transfer project (to "ddp-team")
> You can also first fill the project with everything and later
> transfer it.


If I go to General -> Advanced I just see "Housekeeping" and "Rename
repository" options. No option to transfer the project apparently.

Maybe an alternative to that is to export it and re-import in in the
ddp-team space and remove the 'ddp' project.



> > As I mentioned in my previous email in my view we should first move all
> of
> > DDP SVN "as is", preserving all the history of the former repository.
> Then
> > we could break apart into separate repositories those documents which are
> > currently in trunk.
>
> Maybe in
> https://salsa.debian.org/mehdi/salsa-scripts
> is already a script to do everything?
> But I see only git related stuff there, no svn :~(
>

Marcos has already manually managed the move from SVN to GIT, so I believe
we will use that. I believe the SVN move to GIT is not easily automated,
that is maybe why there is no script for SVN there.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Move of DDP SVN repository to Salsa?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 11 May 2018 at 21:35, Marcos Fouces  wrote:

> Hello
>
> I've done some work on git migration. I started dumping the full svn repo
> in order to check the full content [1]. I also mapped svn user with their
> name and email. So there should be no problem in doing smoothly the rest of
> the migration.
>

Great Marcos, thanks for working on this. You should have access to the
project now and can import the DDP repository there.

> Now, what's your opinion? (Please bear with me :-))
>

My suggestion is we approach this in several steps:

1) We move all the SVN "as is" into GIT with its history.

2) Those documents that are no longer maintained (or out dated) should be
marked as such in their own repository (and excluded from the Makefile if
not already done). We also have to make sure that the changes to a document
status is reflected in www.debian.org (so that the repository does not mark
it as "obsolete" and is marked in the website as "maintained")

3) Those documents which want to have a separate repository are then moved
to the Attic and removed from the repository. I guess we can move them all
to the DDP-team group that was recently created:
https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team (and now has the refcard)


Best regards,


Javier

Re: DDP group on salsa.d.o? (was: Move refcard to salsa?)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 12 May 2018 at 13:11, W. Martin Borgert  wrote:

> On 2018-05-12 12:16, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> > If putting our repos under a "ddp" group means write-access to our repos
> is
> > shared, then I'm in favour of that: it'd save administrative overhead in
> the
> > long run.
>
> That's my understanding: We can give write access to
> non-DDs/non-DMs, as long as we (DDP) trust them...
>
> OK, there is now
> https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team
> and
> https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/refcard
>
> I added just a bunch of people, please just add whoever I missed.
>

It feels like we are not organising ourselves sufficiently. Is there any
way we can move the DDP (project) into the ddp-team (group)?
I only see an option to create a new project and I rather not duplicate the
work I did yesterday if it can be avoided.

As I mentioned in my previous email in my view we should first move all of
DDP SVN "as is", preserving all the history of the former repository. Then
we could break apart into separate repositories those documents which are
currently in trunk.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Move of DDP SVN repository to Salsa?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 8 May 2018 at 15:26, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino <j...@debian.org> wrote:

>
> Tasks to do
>

I have moved the tasks over to the following Wiki page:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ddp/wikis/Migration-from-Alioth

Step 2 (Add all of DDP users to Salsa from Alioth) is done already, I
manually added all the users except for 66 guest users which did not exist
in Salsa.

Best regards

Javier

>

Re: DDP group on salsa.d.o? (was: Move refcard to salsa?)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 12 May 2018 at 09:51, Joost van Baal-Ilić <
joostvb-debian-doc-2018031...@mdcc.cx> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 12:41:47AM +0200, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> > On 2018-05-11 10:54, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> > > Correction: There is even a ddp group, so I'll put it there:
> > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ddp/refcard
> >
> > Oops: ddp is not a group, but an empty repository.
>
> Indeed, g...@salsa.debian.org:debian/ddp.git is an empty repository.
>

Yes, this was just created.


>
> > Why is that so? What is it good for?
>
> Somebody made a mistake, I'd guess.  Or maybe somebody thought about
> storing
> shared ddp infastructure scripts there?  We do have
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/ddp/ddp.git/ : empty too.


That was not a mistake, the idea was to move all of SVN to that GIT
repository. It is currently empty because the migration has not taken place
yet.




> > Shouldn't there be a DDP group with refcard and other stuff as projects?
>
> Ideally refcard, faq, release-notes, project-history etc. would all be
> standalone git repositories (after possibly being converted from svn to
> git) at
> salsa.
>

We can create a DDP group in Salsa for those repositories, how is this
done? I am certainly new to Salsa myself.

>
> I just saw that
>
>  ddp/debian-reference
>  ddp/maint-guide
>  ddp/securing-debian-howto
>
> have a git repo @ alioth; those would have to get migrated from alioth to
> salsa
> (if they haven't yet).
>

FWIW, the securing-debian-howto GIT repository at Alioth does not have the
same contents as SVN. This was migrated from SVN and then changes were done
to migrate from debiandoc-sgml to XML. We will migrate this as an
independent repository to Salsa, but this has not taken place yet.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Debian release-notes: change dblatex style for spanish PDF build

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

> Am Donnerstag 15. Juni 2017 schrieb Javier Fernandez-Sanguino:
>> Dear Holger,
>>
>> On 15 June 2017 at 22:12, Holger Wansing <li...@wansing-online.de> wrote:
>> > I have tested the build without that file, and it works fine now.
>> > The spanish PDF is attached. Could you take the time to check if
>> > everything is fine?
>>
>> Ok. I will check if the style can be removed. However, please notice I
>> have just finished the translation and there is some cleaning /
>> reviewing I would like to do first.

I have confirmed that it works and have removed the file now.  The
issues I had building the PDF files disappeared as soon as I installed
the fonts-sil-charis package.

Best regards

Javier

Re: [Ddp-commits] r11675 - in /manuals/trunk/release-notes: en/old-stuff.dbk sk/about.po sk/installing.po sk/issues.po sk/moreinfo.po sk/old-stuff.po sk/release-notes.po sk/upgrading.po sk/whats-new.p

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear Ivan,

It appears that your Slovak translation updated pushed in also a
change in an English file (old-stuff.dbk) as shown below.

Please do *not* do change the original English files with a
translation update, specially not during a string freeze. This change
has effectively made 1 paragraph "fuzzy" in 9 translations of the
Release Notes that were 100% translated already (es, fr, it, ja, nl,
pl, pt, ru, sv).

This type of minor, cosmetic, changes, should *not* be done during a
string freeze. However, should somebody do this, it is expected that
at least they take the time required to manually unfuzzy PO files
which are already up to date!

I have done this now for 11 translated po files, following your
changes. This includes also the Slovak translated PO file, as it looks
like you "fixed this" first in the translated PO file before changing
the English original.

>From translator to translator: mistakes sometimes can happen, but
please take note and be careful in the future. Changes in the original
English files should never be pushed as part of a translation update.

Best regards

Javier



On 16 June 2017 at 15:30,   wrote:
> Author: helix84-guest
> Date: Fri Jun 16 13:30:52 2017
> New Revision: 11675
>
> URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/ddp/?sc=1=11675
> Log:
> [INTL:sk] Slovak translation update
>
> Modified:
> manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/old-stuff.dbk
(...)
>
> Modified: manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/old-stuff.dbk
> URL: 
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/old-stuff.dbk?rev=11675=diff
> ==
> --- manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/old-stuff.dbk(original)
> +++ manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/old-stuff.dbkFri Jun 16 13:30:52 
> 2017
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
>  refer to stable, it effectively
>  points to  already. This might not be what you want if
>  you are not ready yet for the upgrade.  If you have already run
> -apt-get update, you can still get back without
> +apt-get update, you can still get back without
>  problems by following the procedure below.
>  

Re: Debian release-notes: change dblatex style for spanish PDF build

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear Holger,

On 15 June 2017 at 22:12, Holger Wansing  wrote:
> I have tested the build without that file, and it works fine now.
> The spanish PDF is attached. Could you take the time to check if
> everything is fine?

Ok. I will check if the style can be removed. However, please notice I
have just finished the translation and there is some cleaning /
reviewing I would like to do first.

Additionaly, the PDF build does not seem to be working on my side
(maybe because I do not have the packages fully up to date in my
development environment). I have to fix that first.

> If yes, we could remove that file, to get same style for all langs.
> (The new style is also a big improvement IMO.)

Understood..

Regards

Javier

Re: [release-notes] The two last weeks up to the release

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear Niels,


El 5 jun. 2017 9:23 a. m., "Niels Thykier"  escribió:


I admit it is not a lot of time to finish.  But it should get us a lot
of the way while hopefully leaving enough time for everyone to do their
part.


Thank you for providing a plan for both proofreading, reviews and
translations. With my translator's hat own, I think It is really helpful to
have a plan like this in order to plan days of work.

Best regards,

Javier

Bug#864043: release-notes: proofreading sweep - moreinfo.dbk

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Dear Justin,

Thank you for this review. Although I can agree to many of these changes, I
do not think it is wise to make them so close to the release date, when
translation teams have updated (or are in the process of updating) the
translations in preparation of the Release.

Release Notes should be string frozen at some point, they should not be a
loving target. These type of stylistic changes ("" to "Debian"")
should in my opinion, be done post-release.

At the very least, translation teams should be informed (specially those
currently close to or at 100% [1]). So they are aware and have time to
do/plan a last review/update before $RELEASE.


Saludos

Javier

[1] https://www.debian.org/releases/testing/statistics.html
There are currently 9 (out of 19) translations which are over 90%)

Re: https://manpages.debian.org/ - PARTIAL breakage

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

(Note: copying debian-doc as this is where we discuss any issues with
the manpages service)

On 23 February 2017 at 16:36, Richard Owlett  wrote:
> I just went to https://manpages.debian.org/ and entered chroot in the search
> box.
>
> It sent me to
> https://manpages.debian.org/jessie/manpages-es-extra/chroot.1.es.html .

The redirector tries to find the "best" manpage and forwards you to
that one. Unfortunatley, this seems to be a bug in the
manpages-es-extra manpage, which provides a chroot manpage in section
1 (instead of section 8, where it should be), and confuses the
redirector.

Anyway,  if you want to see the English manpage in section 8 you can
access it by going to: https://manpages.debian.org/8/chroot

> https://manpages.debian.org/jessie/debootstrap/debootstrap.8.en.html .
>
> Following the structural example of that URL I attempted to go to
> https://manpages.debian.org/jessie/chroot/chroot.8.en.html .
> That sent me to
> https://dyn.manpages.debian.org/jessie/chroot/chroot.8.en.html?

The actual URL you should have used is
https://manpages.debian.org/jessie/coreutils/chroot.8.en.html

The URL structure is
///. In the URI you
tried, the service tried to look for a chroot manpage in the chroot
package. But there is no chroot package (it is coreutils), thus the
error you received.

Best regards


Javier

Re: manpages.debian.org has been modernized!

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 23 January 2017 at 22:22, Michael Stapelberg 
wrote:

> Thanks!
>
> I think we could put rewriterules in place to redirect hotlinks to the
> cgi script to the correct place. I can take care of it if you want me
> to.



Thanks Michael. I suggest we wait some time (a month?), go then through the
logs to see what is still using the old CGI and see if the effort is
worthwhile. I am not sure how many users will still be using the the CGI
script (maybe due to references in external sites) after the change.

Best regards

Javier

Re: manpages.debian.org has been modernized!

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 20 January 2017 at 10:25, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino <j...@debian.org>
wrote:

>
>
> This weekend I will modify the CGI so that it redirects to the new
> (static) content for users that at some point still go to the old one. It
> seems that the redirects get cached in the browser permanently because I
> (wrongly) used 301 redirects instead of 302 in the previous configuration.
> It also happens to me in my Android phone.
>

This has now been implemented in the CGI script. Users are now pointed to
the new interface.

Regards

Javier

Re: manpages.debian.org has been modernized!

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 23 January 2017 at 08:49, Paul Wise  wrote:

> On Mon, 2017-01-23 at 08:45 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
>
> > What would be the best way to trigger on mirror pushes?
>
> I'm not sure about that, please ask #debian-mirrors
> or failing that #debian-admin, and or the lists.


Basicly, you give SSH access to an upstream mirror in the account used for
your tool (i.e. in our case 'manpages'). Instead of shell access, access
from the mirror to that account triggers running a task, which, in our
case, would run an archive update the archive.

I agree it is an interesting feature, but the previous service (CGI-based)
just triggered content updates through a cronjob, which was executed once
per month. I do not recall a complain from users mentioning it as "out of
date".

Best regards

Javier

Re: Bug#834977: could any debian-doc member take care of uploading doc-debian 6.4 from SVN soonish? (was: Re: jfs: [...] Bug#834977: debian-doc: Please update doc-debian to reflect new version of the

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 28 August 2016 at 13:23, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino <j...@debian.org>
wrote:

>
>
> On 24 August 2016 at 16:43, Joost van Baal-Ilić <
> joostvb-debian-doc-2016082...@mdcc.cx> wrote:
>
>> > I am afraid I will not be able to do this until maybe mid-september.
>> > Unfortunately I do not have currently access to my development
>> environment.
>>
>> OK, thanks for getting back to me.  I myself am out of time for the next
>> weeks
>> too, so I can join you in saying:
>>
>> > If somebody in the debian-doc group has time to do an upload I would
>> > appreciate it.
>>
>
>
> I've managed to get make some time available today for this upload.
> However, I am struggling with build errors. I will upload a version as soon
> as I fix those.
>

After fixing my local issues I am just uploading a new version of the
package to the archive.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Bug#834977: could any debian-doc member take care of uploading doc-debian 6.4 from SVN soonish? (was: Re: jfs: [...] Bug#834977: debian-doc: Please update doc-debian to reflect new version of the

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 24 August 2016 at 16:43, Joost van Baal-Ilić <
joostvb-debian-doc-2016082...@mdcc.cx> wrote:

> > I am afraid I will not be able to do this until maybe mid-september.
> > Unfortunately I do not have currently access to my development
> environment.
>
> OK, thanks for getting back to me.  I myself am out of time for the next
> weeks
> too, so I can join you in saying:
>
> > If somebody in the debian-doc group has time to do an upload I would
> > appreciate it.
>


I've managed to get make some time available today for this upload.
However, I am struggling with build errors. I will upload a version as soon
as I fix those.

Best regards

Javier

Re: jfs: could you please upload? (was: Re: Bug#834977: debian-doc: Please update doc-debian to reflect new version of the constitution (1.7))

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 21 August 2016 at 14:06, Joost van Baal-Ilić <
joostvb-debian-doc-2016082...@mdcc.cx> wrote:

> Hi Javier,
>
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 02:01:47PM +0200, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your well documented bug report.  I've fixed all mentioned
> issues in
> > doc-debian's SVN.
>
> Could you please upload doc-debian 6.4?  It's ready in SVN.
>
>
Dear Joost,

I am afraid I will not be able to do this until maybe mid-september.
Unfortunately I do not have currently access to my development environment.

If somebody in the debian-doc group has time to do an upload I would
appreciate it.

Regards

Javier

Re: manpages.d.o: HTTPS vs HTTP

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

El 18/04/2016 19:52, "Jakub Wilk"  escribió:
>
> manpages.d.o is now available over HTTPS (thanks!), but the pages embed
images from http://www.debian.org/. This provokes warnings about mixed
content in Firefox.
>

You are right.  I missed that in the tests I did last weekend.

> The attached patch should fix this.

Thanks for the patch Jakub. I will apply it this weekend.

Regars

Javier

Re: Newbie friendly security and firewall docs (cookbook?)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 6 October 2014 13:53, Richard Owlett rowl...@cloud85.net wrote:

 In the context of -doc the only document I'm aware of is the Securing
 Debian HOWTO.


 I've attempted to digest it. It's too complete - e.g. it talks about
 securing features [web servers etc] that I do not believe should exist on a
 system used by my target audience [including myself].


Yes, the document is targeted towards a sysadmin audience, not a desktop
user. That being said, it should be easy to write a Security for desktops
chapter more targeted towards end-users including do's and dont's and
recommended best practices there.

While it will probably contain all the information you
 require, but it's entirely possible it might scare your friend a bit.


 It scares me ;/


Please go through chapter 2 Before you begin and 3 Before and during the
installation. I think those chapters can be easily applied to a desktop
environment. If they scare you maybe we have to tone down the content.

Best regards

Javier

Re: Securing Debian Manual: Section 5.14.3.2 suggested additions

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 3 June 2014 13:11, Dominic Walden domi...@dwalden.co.uk wrote:
 Joost van Baal-Ilić joostvb-debian-doc-2014060...@mdcc.cx writes:
 No problem.  Could you please paste this message in a Debian bugreport?  That
 way, for sure it won't get lost.  There is a specific Debian package for
 reporting issues with the Securing Debian Manual.

 I've created the patch, but I can't find the package you mean, nor
 does there seem to be an appropriate pseudo-package that I can find.
 I can't find any help on the Debian Documentation Project either.

 Any guidance?

Dominic, thanks for reminding me of this. I have it in my TODO but
I'm quite swamped with Real Life (TM) work at the moment.

I will write a brief section in the document describing how to send
bug reports for the document itself. As Joost said, the
printable/offline versions of the document are distributed through the
'harden-doc' package so that's where bug reports should go to.

Thanks again for your assistance,

Best regards


Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/cab9b7utrgzxfnqhr2gqdnqnvvtrson9ltlxav2vvhsdqbgm...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Out of date man pages

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

El 21/05/2014 14:04, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org escribió:

 Hi!

 It seems some man pages (I've not checked to what extent this goes)
 from http://manpages.debian.org/ do not match the latest versions
 from unstable. For example deb(5) or dpkg(1).


There was an error in the extraction scripts that prevented new manpages
from being available.

The script is now fixed and I've forced it to extract them again.  The
issue should be fixed today or tomorrow.

 I've checked the debian-doc list archives, but I don't see any recent
 reference to this, so I'm not sure if this is a known issue.

No, it was not known and has passed undetected for a few months.  I have to
try improve the monthly reports to detect these issues.

 BTW, m.d.o is a great service!

I'm glad you find it useful!

Regards

Javier
Hi!

It seems some man pages (I've not checked to what extent this goes)
from http://manpages.debian.org/ do not match the latest versions
from unstable. For example deb(5) or dpkg(1).

I've checked the debian-doc list archives, but I don't see any recent
reference to this, so I'm not sure if this is a known issue.

BTW, m.d.o is a great service!

Thanks,
Guillem

Re: manpages.debian.net issues?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 24 October 2013 07:57, Robert W. Oliver II rwoliv...@gmail.com wrote:
 Javier,

 I can confirm your instructions work on my local Debian 7.1 machine.  Good
 documentation! :)

Thanks, upon re-installing the service on new machines I've seen some
things that could be improved / be better documented.

But it's encouraging to see that someone else can replicate the setup. Thanks!

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAB9B7Uv_n511u5K2hefTvswzL6=prkkd+mmhjjnwufo0nac...@mail.gmail.com

Re: manpages.debian.net issues?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

(Sorry, I replied to Paul and not to the list)

On 21 October 2013 08:01, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
 Hi Javier,

 I note that manpages.debian.net is down. I asked DSA on IRC and they
 said you haven't responded for their calls for help moving it to another
 machine and that they would not be re-enabling it without responsive
 maintainers for the service.

FWIW nobody contacted me regarding this service. So I do not see how I
can be considered unresponsive and not responding to calls for
help.  To the best of my knowledge I have not received any email
regarding planned downtime (or the need for migration of this
service). I'm unable to find any such notice in my mailbox, and
neither I see a note in debian-services-admin (the list where
services' administrators have to monitor for such issues) or in
debian-project.

Had I received either advance warning or warning post-incident I would
have taken action. I'm surprised by DSA's response here.

Should I have found out about the downtime myself? I don't have a
monitoring system in place to warn me when this service is unavailable
(I actually asked DSA about this last year), and I don't use it myself
every day.  Consequently, it is unlikely I will know it's down unless
somebody notifies me.

The first notice I have received is via these emails (sent by users)
to the debian-doc mailing list.

 Are you still interested in maintaining this service?

Yes, I am. I gave invested quite some time on the service and want to
keep it running for our users.

Could someone tell me in which DSA-managed host should I setup this
new service? I will need not only shell access (which I assume is
readily available for DDs), I will also need to change the web
server's configuration (so access to the configuration files + rights
to restart it would be fine, but a point of contact is good enough
too).


 Is anyone else on the debian-doc list interested in helping provide
 web-accessible manual pages for Debian users?

As you pointed out, setting up a replica of this service should be
easy (I tried to document all the setup in the debian-doc repo and the
code is fully up-to-date). Some of the steps might not be obvious, but
the setup is easily repeatable in another host.

Anyway, if I get pointed to where should I move the service too I will
try to get the service running (DNS change + software installation and
configuration) through this week.

Best regards,

Javier

PS: Sorry, no signed e-mail during work hours, I don't have my GPG key
available.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/cab9b7uvswrngswyrm7fm91doalxkvd7uk7uyo1bbr0djpdc...@mail.gmail.com

Re: ddp build failed

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hmm,...

On 5 May 2013 00:24, Debian Webmaster webmas...@debian.org wrote:
 /srv/www.debian.org/ddp-svn/make.log-debiandoc2html -C -l en.utf-8 
 project-history.sgml
 /srv/www.debian.org/ddp-svn/make.log-nsgmls:project-history.sgml:1009:72:E: 
 end tag for element A which is not open
 /srv/www.debian.org/ddp-svn/make.log-nsgmls:project-history.sgml:1011:24:E: 
 end tag for element A which is not open
 /srv/www.debian.org/ddp-svn/make.log-nsgmls:project-history.sgml:1026:72:E: 
 end tag for element ULINK which is not open
 /srv/www.debian.org/ddp-svn/make.log-mv: cannot stat `project-history.html': 
 No such file or directory

Please ignore these errors, they are already fixed in SVN. I guess
that since the cronjobs are still stopped due to the Wheezy release
[1] master has not updated the SVN content of the DDP, which prevents
the proper build of this document.

These error should go away tomorrow. If it doesn't, I'll take a look
at it as soon as possible.

Regards

Javier

[1] http://blog.ganneff.de/blog/2013/05/wheezy-release.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAB9B7UucxBqpBB8oqnV4xQ6badVHYsqiviR+=1aai32a3uu...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Bug#548336: restart gnome on squeeze2wheezy upgrades?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

El 30/04/2013 13:36, Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com escribió:

 On Lu, 29 apr 13, 11:49:35, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote:
 
  Please bear in mind that translators are actively working now in the
  Release Notes, if a patch is required, please send it as soon as
possible
  so translators have time before the release to update their translations
  too.

 I haven't seen any call for translations...

There hasn't been one, but many translation teams have fuly translated the
existing content already.

However, it looks like there might be quite a few changes on the document
before the release.

Regards

Javier

Re: restart gnome on squeeze2wheezy upgrades?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

 There still hasn't been one is not ordinary
  when the proposed release date comes in 3 days, is it?

(Please note that I'm talking as an expectator, not as editor, since this
time arounf I've not had a significant role in the RN)

No, it is not common. It seems coordination in this release could have been
better. Unfortunately it looks like not enough people have been working in
the RN document in preparation of the release.

 only {de, es, fr, ja, pl, pt, pt-br, ro, sv} seem to be syncing now

Expected improvements (being discussed in -doc and improving the English
content) in the Release Notes will probably make some of these languages be
out of sync before the release, I'm afraid.

Regards

Javier

Bug#548336: restart gnome on squeeze2wheezy upgrades?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 29 April 2013 11:31, Holger Levsen hol...@layer-acht.org wrote:

 is it desirable to restart gnome on squeeze2wheezy upgrades, like it was
 for
 lenny2squeeze upgrades?


I'm not sure it is desirable, the GNOME team should speak up about this.

On the other hand: currently the Release Notes say that the a system reboot
should be done after the a new kernel is installed. For some systems this
would be done after a minimal upgrade (i.e. running 'apt-get upgrade' but
not 'dist-upgrade') and for others this would happen after the
dist-upgrade, this depends on what the sysadmin prefers.

Maybe we could just say in the Release Notes that a system reboot is
recommended (in non-critical systems) right after the full system is
completely upgraded to confirm that the system boots up properly, all the
services start up as needed and no errors are presented in the boot
process. This would cover both the GNOME case (if it is desirable) and
others, but maybe it is too drastic.

Else, we should document this as requested by this bug. Patches welcome.


Please bear in mind that translators are actively working now in the
Release Notes, if a patch is required, please send it as soon as possible
so translators have time before the release to update their translations
too.

Best regards

Javier

Re: manpages.debian.net and non-default encodings

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 27 December 2012 09:33, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
 I noticed that the manpages.d.n site doesn't seem to support non-default
 encodings. The page for wireless(7) says that only Czech is available
 but the package itself also contains two French translations in
 different encodings, neither of them in the normal directory for French
 translations. Is there a place I could file a bug about this?

There is actually no package for this service, so there is no bug
holder per se.

You can, however, access the manpages source code (it is in the DDP
repository) and create a 'BUGS' file there to list known bugs. The
repo is available online here:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/man-cgi/

Of course,  a bug fix would be even better :)

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAB9B7UuOwvjtjqQOD+ViH8LKsdmG9YUfTr0JR6qose=fzhk...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Problem building RN's PDF in some languages (was: Spanish pdf files)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 23 August 2012 00:13, David Prévot taf...@debian.org wrote:

 Le 01/08/2012 19:42, David Prévot a écrit :
  Le 14/04/2012 07:31, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino a écrit :
  I will try to review the issues and see what's wrong with the build.
 
  It looks like some encoding issue, probably related to the (assumed)
  default encoding for some language, and the text automatically added for
  some language; e.g. Apéndice in Spanish:

 Found a workaround for half of the issue: PDF for es, pt and pt_BR are
 back. More investigation is needed to fix cs, ru and sk…

 Thanks a lot for taking care of this and fixing it!

Regards

Javier

Re: Considering an harden-doc upload for Wheezy

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Sure, go ahead. I cannot take care of this at the moment but feel free to
add the debian/ subdirectory to the DDP SVN.

On the other hand, the document needs an update for Wheezy. If anyone wants
to colaborate feel free to send patches or update the SVN directly.

Regards

Javier

El 20/08/2012 01:57, David Prévot taf...@debian.org escribió:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Hi Javier,

Would you consider a (team) upload for the securing-howto? The debian/
directory doesn't seem to be hosted on the DDP repository, would you
mind to commit it there?

Since the last upload, only the French translation has been updated, now
handled with po4a, and is almost complete (2466 translated messages, 12
fuzzy translations, 30 untranslated messages). I'd be happy to
coordinate with you in order to push an up to date translation in Wheezy
(only the last two appendices are left to update, the rest of the
translation has already been reviewed).

Not sure how long the “translation updates and documentation fixes”
freeze exception will stand, but to be on the safe side, I'd be in favor
of uploading the package really soon (the current translation status
being anyway a lot better than the one currently in Wheezy, not updated
in years).

Regards

David

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
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=h81+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Who maintains manpages.debian.net?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 29/06/2012, Arno Töll a...@debian.org wrote:
 On 29.06.2012 23:01, Martin Eberhard Schauer wrote:
 today I had a look at a section 3 manpage for unstable. I was
 offered an outdated version. Where is the right place to complain -
 to suggest importing an up to date version?

It seems that the scripts that run the extraction of the manpages are,
for some reason, not working properly. I've also noticed that the
manpages for sid/unstable are out of date. I have to review why it's
failing.

 you could ask Javier, the maintainer [1] (CC:ed). Granted having contact
 details on the home page directly would help a lot.

That's in the TODO too. The README file in the sources [2] describes
the service and who maintains it (me) but this is not too visible, I
have to introduce this information in the web pages so it's easier to
find.

Patches to the sources (avialable in DDP's SVN) are appreciated, if
somebody finds the time and is inclined to give a hand fixing these
issues.

Regards

Javier


[2] http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/man-cgi/README.txt?view=log


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAB9B7UsJwSOSv=UU3gh4AwNqtYgKm_Q=jbcz0fn8p98+dht...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Spanish pdf files

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

I will try to review the issues and see what's wrong with the build.

However, if build in unstable is working fine, wouldn't it be best to have
a way to build documents in a chroots and make www-master use those (some
kind of override of the general stable builds).

Regards

Javier

El 13/04/2012 18:42, David Prévot taf...@debian.org escribió:

Hi,

Le 13/04/2012 10:50, Ricardo a écrit :


 In the web http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/releasenotes, all in
 Spanish pdf files are bro...
Thanks for mentioning it. Actually the following languages had been
disabled this summer because the build failed on Squeeze:

   cs es pt_BR pt ru sk

We needed more investigation before reactivating them but obviously
forgot about it. If someone has an idea how to fix those build on
Squeeze (they build fine on current Sid), your help is welcome!

Regards

David

Re: ddp build failed

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

This is a bug I introduced in a recent change in the document. I will
fix it tonigh (if nobody beats me to it, that is)

Sorry for the noise,

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/cab9b7uu4ozkc+gyxwi5tlh8kkou+9-s7cnmjdjftxfvvcnh...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Problems building debian-faq to zh_CN

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 06/03/2012, David Prévot taf...@debian.org wrote:
 Sorry, that was just me being silly: my pbuilder error was just a “No
 space left on device.” one. Are you sure to build it in a clean Sid
 environment?

Well, it's a sid environment but not neccesarily clean. I have not try
with pbuilder, will retry.

 If I'm not able to solve the issue I will
 have to build  upload without that translation.

 Would you mind if I send a ~10 days translation call before the upload?
 Only French seems currently handled with po4a, but I'll ask other
 translators to consider switching (even if that won't probably within
 ten days, they may be able to update their translations in the meantime).


i'm OK with the translation call before the upload. Could you do it?
On behalf of the Spanish translation team I guess we should switch to
po4a.

 The offer still stands. I don't mind team uploading it on your behalf
 either if you don't manage to sort your build issues.

If you can build it in your system, please, go ahead and do an upload.
I will try to sort out the issues in my end.

Thanks!

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAB9B7Uvpb9FjZCgHDu+t4nQZiGYZNpDk=zr-as7vo75yaun...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Typo in A Brief History of Debian

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

That page is not a page, its a document and I'm not in favor of removing
content. New content for the latest releases is ok, and welcome.

As for your suggestions, I will try to tackle them soon and fix the
document. If somebody wants to submit a patch for review it would be most
welcome.

Regards

Javier

El 30/12/2011 15:17, Justin B Rye j...@edlug.org.uk escribió:

Andrea Brugiolo wrote:
 I suppose the phrase May old libraries were removed... wanted to be
 M...
Agreed.  That page could do with some love - I would suggest throwing
out some of the less important facts about Etch and Lenny now that
they're no longer news - but I'll restrict my comments below to the
section for Squeeze.

# Debian 6.0 _Squeeze_ (February 2011): named for the green three-eyed
# aliens in the movie.

Drop in the movie now that we're using names from more than one.

# The release was frozen in August 6, 2010, with many of the Debian
# developers gathered at the 10th Debconf at New York City.

This paragraph seems pointless - it's the page's only mention of a
Debconf, and it's a jump backwards in time from 2011 to 2010.

# Changes include the new FreeBSD port, providing a new kernel: KfreeBSD
# which was made available for two architectures (i386 and amd64)
# including the Kernel and userland tools as well as common server
# software but not advanced desktop features yet. This was made
# available as a technology preview. This was the first time a Linux
# distribution has been extended to also allow use of a non-Linux kernel.

It seems to me that this would read better if the technology preview
line came earlier.  It would also benefit from a bit of rephrasing.
For a start the Kernel doesn't need a capital letter, and in the
HTML markup it's strings like i386 that deserve to be inside
code/code tags, not phrases like FreeBSD port.

# One arquitecture (alpha) was dropped.
   ^^
Typo.

# The new release introduced a dependency based boot sequence, which
# allowed for parallel init script processing, speeding system startup.

(This is a bit arguable - startpar was available as an option in
Lenny, and the move to dash as system shell deserves some of the
credit for faster boot times - but I'll leave it.)

# May old libraries were removed such as GTK 1.1
  ^^
Typo.  But how is this newsworthy?  All releases involve things being
dropped, and the disappearance of a particular GTK version is hardly
something that is going to leap out at end users as significant
(compared to, for instance, no longer needing an xorg.conf).  Also...
was GTK 1.1 ever in Lenny in the first place?  The nearest I see in
Oldstable oldlibs is libgtk1.2!

So I would suggest rewriting it all as:


 Debian 6.0 _Squeeze_ (February 2011): named for the green three-eyed
 aliens.

 While one architecture ('alpha') was dropped, two architectures of
 the new FreeBSD port ('kfreebsd-i386' and 'kfreebsd-amd64') were
 made available as a technology preview, including the kernel and
 userland tools as well as common server software (though not
 advanced desktop features yet). This was the first time a Linux
 distribution has been extended to also allow the use of a non-Linux
 kernel.

 The new release introduced a dependency-based boot sequence, which
 allowed for parallel init script processing, speeding system startup.

Or here it is with markup:

p
Debian 6.0 emSqueeze/em (February 2011): named for the green three-eyed
aliens.
/p
p
While one architecture (codealpha/code) was dropped, two architectures
of the new a href=http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/;FreeBSD/a
port (codekfreebsd-i386/code and codekfreebsd-amd64/code) were made
available as a quot;technology previewquot;, including the kernel and
userland tools as well as common server software (though not advanced
desktop
features yet). This was the first time a Linux distribution has been
extended
to also allow the use of a non-Linux kernel.
/p
p
The new release introduced a dependency-based boot sequence, which allowed
for parallel init script processing, speeding system startup.
/p


--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
   sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. ...
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111230134344.ga20...@xibalba.demon.co.uk

Re: Typo in A Brief History of Debian

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 30 December 2011 19:36, Justin B Rye j...@edlug.org.uk wrote:
 Sorry, I was intending to attach a patch, but the latest version
 accessible via apt-get source doesn't yet have the section about
 Squeeze, so I made do with just including the corrected markup.

FYI the latest sources are in the SVN repository of the Documentation
project. More specifically at
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/manuals/trunk/project-history/

The webpage is not up-to-date either since some changes have been
committed to SVN and the webpage only updates when the package is
update (which is still pending).

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAB9B7Uvjde=sqJiTn=vDVAi-Jy8bTGp=yBFu=snxzkoupjg...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Typo in A Brief History of Debian

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 30 December 2011 14:43, Justin B Rye j...@edlug.org.uk wrote:
 Andrea Brugiolo wrote:
 I suppose the phrase May old libraries were removed... wanted to be
 Many old libraries were removed..., at the end of the page
 http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/project-history/ch-releases.en.html

 Agreed.  That page could do with some love - I would suggest throwing
 out some of the less important facts about Etch and Lenny now that
 they're no longer news - but I'll restrict my comments below to the
 section for Squeeze.
(...)

I've taken most of this comments on board. Full diff is available in
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/manuals/trunk/project-history/project-history.sgml?r1=9019r2=9025

 # Debian 6.0 _Squeeze_ (February 2011): named for the green three-eyed
 # aliens in the movie.

 Drop in the movie now that we're using names from more than one.

In the movie was used in many parts of the document so I've adjusted
it somewhat (but not dropped it) and add a reference to a specific Toy
Story movie in some case. As for your comment: I believe the only name
we've used so far that does not come from the first movie is Wheezy.

I've also fixed this (in SVN) in the answer to the FAQ about the
codenames: 
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/ch-ftparchives.en.html#s-codenames

 # The release was frozen in August 6, 2010, with many of the Debian
 # developers gathered at the 10th Debconf at New York City.

 This paragraph seems pointless - it's the page's only mention of a
 Debconf, and it's a jump backwards in time from 2011 to 2010.

Debconf is mentioned in other parts of the document. I'm not dropping this.

(...)
 So I would suggest rewriting it all as:

I've taken used suggestion and included it in the document.

Thanks

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/cab9b7uvhcmvo4j-m-wxk4oq1jw8x73zof7kuq12fi2daov0...@mail.gmail.com

Upload of the Project-history package soon?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hi Bdale,

I've made some changes to the project history document and seen that you have
made recently some too. Since the document is not updated at the website from
SVN now but only when the package is uploaded I was wondering when were you
thinking of making an upload?

I would do that myself but when I try to build it locally the Japanese PDF
build fails. Any tips?

Regards,

Javier

PD: Happy New Year!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: release notes for wheezy

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 22 March 2011 16:39, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
 While we're at this... At what point should we branch the release notes
 for squeeze?  Around the wheezy freeze, or earlier?

I would suggest around wheezy freeze, maybe some months earlier, but
certainly not in some time. Right now we still have some content (i.e.
Bugs) to add (fix) in Squeeze's Release Notes and throughout the next
months people will still be upgrading to Squeeze so we should expect
more bugs to the Release Notes in this period.

Regards

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTik2o8ofPTfxtpk3kV9+mPN3xF64uWYVvj=SR=g...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#612250: release-notes: Loss of keyboard and mouse may occur during upgrade

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 7 February 2011 07:27, Karl O. Pinc k...@meme.com wrote:
 During upgrade the text console was lost and replaced with a gdm login
 screen.  The second time this occurred neither the keyboard or mouse
 would respond.  Unplugging and replugging each of these USB devices
 resovled the problem.

Thank you for your patch we will consider it for the Release Notes. As
for this issue, since the move from text console to gdm is quite
common (and confuses users) we are consider asking the users, when
upgrading, to stop the gdm service so that there is no switch back and
forth. We still have to consider the best approach to this issue,
however.

Best regards

Javier



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTik·6zLFA1Fdb1n7si6exhdedcxnvbfm...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Tweak required for release notes 'publishing' at www-master

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 7 February 2011 08:39, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino j...@debian.org wrote:
 Maybe it's some kind of permissions issue? There was a manual run of
 the Release Notes build+publish target last Saturday to update the RN
 for the CDs/DVDs build, maybe that is the culprit?

Ok, found the issue. It's because of the change introduced in the
release-notes.ent [1] which added two new architectures to the list
('kfreebsd-amd64' and 'kfreebsd-i386') that the build started failing.
This change was introduced by tariff saturday afternoon. Since the
cron tasks for the website were stopped there was no regeneration of
content Saturday mornign and this change, as well as the change of
'testing' at www.debian.org broke the publication of the release
notes.

This is quite clear when you see this like in the build logs [2]:

(...)
cp -pr  statistics.html /srv/www.debian.org/www/releases/squeeze/; \
echo AddCharset UTF-8 .txt 
/srv/www.debian.org/www/releases/squeeze/.htaccess; \
for arch in kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386; do \
 
  make architecture=$arch; \
(...)

But the Makefile says:


(...)
arches := $(shell grep 'phrase arch=' $(CURDIR)/$(manual).ent \
| sed 's/.* arch=.\([a-z0-9]*\).*/\1/' | sort -u)

(...)
publish: statistics.html
(...)
$(install_file) statistics.html $(PUBLISHDIR)/; \
echo AddCharset UTF-8 .txt  $(PUBLISHDIR)/.htaccess; \
for arch in $(arches); do \
  $(MAKE) architecture=$$arch; \


So $arches is not being properly expanded with the regular expression
(probably because of the '-' in the name of the kfreebsd arches. Since
the only change to the .ent file was the above I'm blaming the
addition of kfreebsd to the release notes build.

To confirm this, you can check the Releas Notes for kfreebsd at [3]
you will see that they have an earlier date than the other
architectures (I changed the 'published' entity throughout the
weekend) and the Spanish version [4] is fully up to date, whileas it
is not updated in the other architectures.

I really cannot understand that change introduced Saturday: the
Release Notes for the kFreeBSD preview have not been reviewed to
ensure that they do not have Linuxisms... they do have (actually quite
some). As Release Notes editor I would have voted against publishing
Release Notes for kFreeBSD at all.

Yay for changes in the middle of the release! grumble

The easy fix is remove them from the release-notes.ent file again. If
someone can do it throughout the day I would appreciate it (no commit
access until tonight). The proper fix probably comes by fixing the
arches extraction in the Makefile.

Let's see if I can introduce tonigh some sanity checks here and there
so that this does not happen in the future. Maybe by ensuring that
$arches is at least a reasonable number.

Best Regards

Javier

[1]  
http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/release-notes.ent?r1=8021r2=8424
[2] http://www-master.debian.org/build-logs/webwml/release-notes.log
[3] 
http://www.debian.org/releases/squeeze/kfreebsd-i386/release-notes/index.en.html
[4] 
http://www.debian.org/releases/squeeze/kfreebsd-i386/release-notes/index.es.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikga70+exlrlmgpewyi2kfu4uqkldbjwhkfj...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Squeeze released: old version of release-notes on the website

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2011/2/7 Holger Wansing li...@wansing-online.de:
 I fear this is not correct.

You are partly right, there was an issue with the content at the
website, it was not being updated properly since (at least) the
weekend. Now, after a few things have been fixed in several places, it
is being updated properly and the content of the Release Notes for
*all* languages (English included) should be up to date. Please check
again the website to confirm.

I have not run 'update-po' for all languages and committed this so the
statistics [1] are not yet up-to-date. There was some content included
recently which might shown in English in translations (e.g. #612166).

Unfortunately, the contents of the official DVDs/CDs might not be
current with the translated content. I'm not sure what was distributed
in them (have yet to look) but, in any case, there will be a new
re-release in one month (6.0.1) so we should target in having
everything working out for that one. No good going back to the past.

Regards

Javier

PS: For the next release we might want to suggest having a separate CD
image for documentation including the Release Notes, the FAQ, the
Installation Manual and other documentation so that the documentation
images can be updated indepedently (and not affecting) the
CDs/DVDs/BDs of the released software.


[1] http://www.debian.org/releases/squeeze/statistics.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTi=7eXNd33c3xHAkg8P=mdx5d4dufzcngdb1g...@mail.gmail.com

Re: update of DDP related web pages (phase 1)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 7 February 2011 06:41, Ean Schuessler e...@brainfood.com wrote:
 Seems like having the XSL emit the same wrapper HTML wouldn't be terribly
 hard. Where do the build scripts for that live (revision control)?

The DDP content is generated through Makefiles and scripts living at
'svn://svn.debian.org/ddp/manuals/trunk manuals'

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTinS4JcjVBXof-H8GCWsFyh=TeYfj=xfrtcmt...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Tweak required for release notes 'publishing' at www-master

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 7 February 2011 01:15, Simon Paillard spaill...@debian.org wrote:
(...)
 So it should not be necessary to handle the specific case introduced in the
 cronjob.

Ok, I will remove the hack tonight if nobody beats me to it.

 www-master is finishing wml build, so let's see tomorrow if everything is ok
 for release-notes.

It doesn't look like it work. Statistics have been updated but the
content hasn't. I can easily tell because I changed the content of the
date from '2010-11-12' to 'February 4th, 2011' and neither the english
version of the Release Notes nor the translations are up to date on
that. And the Spanish Release Notes version still shows a lot of
untranslated content even though the statistics [1] claim it is 100%
translated.

Maybe it's some kind of permissions issue? There was a manual run of
the Release Notes build+publish target last Saturday to update the RN
for the CDs/DVDs build, maybe that is the culprit?

Another possible culprit is the changes I introduced in the Makefile
for the 'publish' target, since the logs [2]  are currently
unavailable I cannot tell..

Regards

Javier


[1] http://www.debian.org/releases/squeeze/statistics.html
[2] http://www-master.debian.org/build-logs/ddp/ gives a 404 due to
somebody tweaking the vhost config at www-master (at least its nice
looking :-)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTinF3LLa9iG33eWbo9sEPvKR9eLHh=4rt47oo...@mail.gmail.com

Re: \n or not to \n in Release Notes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 1 February 2011 22:07, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
 37 fuzzy lines for almost just adding a leading \n. (I had some
 spelling errors to take care of too =))

 Care to explain what you're talking about?  upgrading.dbk has not
 changed recently.

Maybe this is related to the use of po4a? I've found that sometimes
some content (the examples' text with commands) shows up when updating
the po with or without \n and the translation (which, in any case,
does not add anything) changes from ok to fuzzy.

Martin, maybe this is the problem?

Regards

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTi=sxv7kernjvjhrhgabjj1potwm1oqo68qaj...@mail.gmail.com

Re: svn write access for release-notes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

 It's no longer the case (2 days ago, hence my remark), I wonder why Javier 
 made
 that change:
 http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/Makefile?r1=7038r2=8202

I changed it because I thought the Makefile was written to prevent it
from using *older* versions of po4a (not newer). I was not aware of
issues with newer versions of po4a. My bad.

If the issue is that the files have to be generated with *precisely*
version 0.34 then we should revert the change and add a warning in the
Makefile.

Should I do this?

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTimEH=vetrwvgc3++jo0rm2ndd0td-a5_5wjo...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#610768: release-notes: python default is 2.6, not 2.5

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 23 January 2011 23:50, Thijs Kinkhorst th...@debian.org wrote:
 On Sunday 23 January 2011 12:07:05 Julien Cristau wrote:
   The release notes list that the default python is now 2.5, whole it is
   actually 2.6 (as per apt-cache show python).
 
 
 
  I fixed this in SVN, thanks for pointing it out.
 
 

 Your fix is wrong, python2.5 is still in squeeze, so it won't be
 removed.  python2.4 is only in lenny, but I'm not sure it should get
 removed on upgrades.

You are right Julien, I've ammended the fix to point at least that
python2.4 is replaced by python2.6 (not 2.5). I'm not sure either if
it will be removed. Reviewing the upgrade logs from testing
(virtualized) systems it seems that even though the python metapackage
now points to 2.6 this does not mean that 2.5 will be removed.

User's coming from a default installation from etch to  lenny might
have gotten python2.4 already removed. So it might not make sense to
point to an upgrade to squeeze.

 Updated patch now still indicates that python2.6 is the new default python but
 that python2.4 is the obsolete one. See attached.

I applied this change since the previous one was not correct.

Regards

Javier



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimmj1unvs_5bsdix2hnxme9v5mmfzvd6y4az...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#609868: update suggestions for: What's new in the distribution?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 13 January 2011 11:35, Ana Guerrero a...@debian.org wrote:
 - Does it make sense there mentioning stuff like 'maradns' (100 popcorn)
 or 'dia' ?

Maybe we can review the list based on popularity contest. I'm not
aware of any place where we have aggregated information that lists all
packages sorted by popularity, both the version in stable, and the one
in testing for review. (like packages.qa.debian.org but instead of
individually per maintainer for the full distribution). Is there any?

We are carrying over a list from previous Release Notes and it might
need ammendments.

 - what about mentioning GTK, Qt4? Qt 4 was updated from 4.3-1 to 4.6.3 .

Could be added.

 - It also can be nice mentioning new popular packages like chromium, but I 
 can not think
 in any other package in this category besides chromium right now. Looking at
 the list of source packages acepted since Lenny nothing else catched my eye.
 It has been mentioned in IRC the nouveau xorg driver, it is not a new package 
 itself, so
 not sure how it fits.

Chromium is less popular than even dia.

Regards

Javier



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTikjaSKaRfNgRcCGX1yvDpQ1=trcozvf3kvab...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#609868: update suggestions for: What's new in the distribution?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 13 January 2011 16:19, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org wrote:
 I think one could construct these data based upon the popcon submissions
 themselves, but I fear, there are not aggregate in UDD or any other easy
 usable form.

Just for reference, in the past I've used Distrowatch's table:
(http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=debian) for this, which
is good since it tracks components and not packages and works around
the issues of having 'dummy packages'. Although I usually review
manually the results to verify them before putting them in the Release
Notes.

Regards

Javier



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktik9fbfuyddn84xydrjibkt09ineomtxv8oyz...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Release Notes ready to *start* updating translations?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 8 January 2011 19:19, Andrei Popescu andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
 What do you think/suggest?

As Christian said,  please try to update the translation and keep up
with the Release Note changes. Changes to the Release Notes are still
expected as there are bugs still open in the BTS that have to be
handled. Tthe content that is already there should be more or less
stable and probably it will be the case that *more* content is added
rather than content is changed.

Note, however, that there are still sections labeled 'fixme' in SGML
which might not be worth translating as they might be removed in the
final version of the Release Notes. These sections, unfortunately,
will show up in the PO files for translators so you have to manually
check the SGML to see which ones are specifically labeled like that. I
would suggest not translating (or updating) this sections.

In any case, Julien Cristau can probably add more here as he has been
leading the charge this last month in updating the Release Notes.

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlkti=w44ffhf1kj1sb6nxisftgsqlfbhepbigjr...@mail.gmail.com

Re: question regarding release-notes:old-stuff.po

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 4 January 2011 23:32, Hendrik Boom hend...@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
 SO I'd read it as: make sure you use a UTF-8 locale when you're
 upgrading (I believe a patch to the release notes in in the
 works suggesting you upgrade locales *first*).  But your users may still
 have to use what they have to.

That was not the intention. The intention was to ask the system
administrator to review the locale defined by the users in the system
and change them. The wording by Vincent is accurate.

Regards

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinhgvn7d_oymrre6gphd1s94h9hrupe+nj+d...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#608108: release-notes §1.1 does not explain where the source is

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 27/12/2010, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
 Package: release-notes
 Severity: minor

 Section 1.1 1.1. Reporting bugs on this document of the squeeze
 release notes says:
(...)

 Perhaps the cross-reference is stale?  I find no information on
 release notes sources in that section.

Yes, the cross-reference is not correct. The actual sources are
available in the DDP's SVN and browsable at
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/#_manuals_trunk_release-notes_

Regards

Javier



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinvywa2+ykkqzhcetqtapfng0zqmmxghoycx...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#607719: release-notes: Spelling error

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 21 December 2010 13:14, Mathew Meins math...@internode.on.net wrote:
 Found a minor spelling error in upgrading.dbk, under section 4.11 (Obsolete
 packages.) I suspect this is supposed to be than for thousand, rather than
 thanfor thousand.

Thanks for the report. I will fix this as soon as possible (currently
my Internet connection is down, unfortunately).

As the Release Notes are not yet finalised we have not yet done a full
spell check review of them, but it certainly needs to be done.


Regards

Javier



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinvkpewybzxnassyyep+qvx52lsaku8beytc...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Spanish translation of maint-guide

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 4 December 2010 18:11, Innocent De Marchi tangram.pe...@gmail.com wrote:
 I just saw that the translation has been replaced by another
 incomplete today. I do not understand why this substitution.

Hi there,

The reason I inadvertently changed the translation is because I was
provided an alternative one by members of the Spanish translation team
in the team mailing list. When I was going to commit, I reviewed the
PO header and found this:


# SOME DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
# Copyright (C) YEAR Free Software Foundation, Inc.
# This file is distributed under the same license as the PACKAGE package.
# FIRST AUTHOR em...@address, YEAR.
#
msgid 
msgstr 
Project-Id-Version: \n
POT-Creation-Date: 2010-12-01 22:35+0900\n
PO-Revision-Date: 2010-12-01 22:43+0900\n
Last-Translator: Osamu Aoki os...@debian.org\n
Language-Team: \n
Language: \n
MIME-Version: 1.0\n
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n


This was clearly an indicative of an *improper* PO file for many
reasons. And I (wrongly) assumed the PO file was not current and
overwrote it. As it turns, it had a 100% finished translation, even if
it does not follow the rules for translations defined by the Spanish
Translation Team.

Some facts:

a) I originally translated this document [1] 11 years ago, but have
not worked with it for the last 3 years.
b) There was ongoing work at the debian-l10n-spanish mailing list to
update this translation
c) I was notified of this translation by personal email, but alas, I
missed it and focused in the debian-l10n-spanish work
d) Bug #604710 was open but the debian-l10n-spanish was not notified.
e) Osamu, being document maintainers (but non-native Spanish speaker)
commited the file provided into SVN.

So we actually had both an independent translator (Innocent De Marchi)
working outside of the main group and people in the translation group
that were (at a slower pace) updating the transltion. The first
translation was finished and was not approved by *any* of the previous
translators before it was commited.

In any case, I appreciate the work done by Innocent De Marchi to
update the translation. As well as Osamu's work to convert it to the
PO format and commit it. I have reverted the change I made in SVN to
the previous translation and added a *proper* PO file header. I'm also
starting to review it and will ask the translation team to do so too.

However, I would like to add some comments here on how, from my point
of view, translations for Debian-specific documentation should be
managed upstream (and I'm adding debian-doc to get this also across to
other documentation maintainers):

1.- When a document maintainer gets a new translation for a document
that was previous translated he should at least contact *both* the
previous translators as well as the language team mailing list.

2.- Maintainers of documentation should ask translators  who contact
them if they are working within an exisiting  team. If not (which
might occur just because they don't know the team) they should be
asked to work within the team, whenever possible.

3.- Commits to translated material should be consensuated with the
team or previous translators. At the very best, if a known volunteer
of the translation team or a coordinator exists and has access to the
repository, he should be in charge of the update.

If done by the documentation maintainer, and  the documentation
maintainer is not knowledgeable of the language and the translation
rules followed by the team he should only approve updates after
waiting for a reasonable time for an answer.

As a documentation maintainer myself of a few Debian-specific
documents, I've followed these rules myself in the past and would
appreciate if others do so too.

I know that 100% translation is the holy grail for some, but for some
others we would really have high quality translations and that means
that peer review is required. Having a standing member of the team do
commits to the repositories, instead of a maintainer which is *not*
acquainted with the language (or, even, the new translator himself),
should guarantee that there is at least a quality review gate before a
translation from a new contributor is accepted.

This should prevent issues like the ones that happened with this
translation: two independent works being done in parallel with
different quality levels which leads to confusion, clash and some
general chaos.

Best regards

Javier

[1] Unfortunately, the CVS history was lost with the migration to SVN,
but can be found here:
http://cvs.debian.org/debian-doc/ddp/manuals.sgml/maint-guide/maint-guide.es.sgml?view=log


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 

Re: release notes: questions about some recent changes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 14 November 2010 10:33, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:19:38PM +0100, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote:
  - r7736 doesn't seem useful?

 Well, it was requested in some bug report. It doesn't hurt.

 Which bug report requested this?  There's no bug number mentioned in the
 commit message.

I don't seem to be able to find it now. I think it was in a comment by
passing in an upgrade-report.

 I agree with Julien that adding alternative commands here makes the release
 notes less clear, and would prefer this be reverted.  Everywhere else in the
 release notes, we've gone to a good deal of effort to *drop* references to
 aptitude.

Ok, I've removed it from the RN now.

Regards

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimrenrzovxibn_efcqna54xumgo8zvcrky_f...@mail.gmail.com

Re: release notes: questions about some recent changes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

On 9 November 2010 17:20, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
 Hi Javier,

 I have some comments/questions on recent changes to r-n svn:
 - r7732: why talk about vol_id and blkid?  lenny's e2fsprogs has blkid,
  so the mention of vol_id seems superfluous

I thought we need to talk about both because users could change to
using UUIDs *before* the upgrade. Reading bug reports I came to
believe that vold_id was not available in lenny's e2fsprogs. I believe
I did some testing in a VM to this effect.

If it's there then we could drop it, the goal of the information was
to facilitate the change before the upgrade.


 - r7734 talks about a kernel upgrade, which seems irrelevant

That's true, the only upgrade needed for this would be e2fsprogrs.
Could be removed, or e2fsprogrs could be explectely mentioned if it is
indeed required. (see above).


 - r7735 says 'default kernel in lenny', but the change actually uses the
  kernel version from squeeze.  Which is it?

Commit log is wrong, it should be squeeze's

 - r7736 doesn't seem useful?

Well, it was requested in some bug report. It doesn't hurt.

 - r7737 should probably be i386 and amd64 only, since that's the only
  archs with grub in lenny

It's currently 'fixme' so it's not printed out. In any case you are
right, I will change that.

 - I don't understand the TODO in the upgrading-udev section.  The
  preinst check was specifically changed to display a debconf screen
  instead of aborting, what more needs to be tested?

I wanted to test it out in a VM to see the actual behaviour just to
ensure that we are proposing something same. If the upgrade of the
kenel+udev (jointly, not in two steps) prevents the debconf prompt it
might be better to suggest that instead of suggesting first kernel and
then udev.

 - r7744 suggests downgrading udev, but that won't be possible after
  upgrading the rest of userspace, so I'm not sure how useful that
  suggestion is

Since we are suggesting first an upgrade of the kernel+udev+reboot
before the full upgrade I think a downgrade is possible, since most of
userspace is not yet installed.

The steps currently are:

1.- upgrade the kernel and udev
2.- reboot
3.- do full upgrade

We recommend the following for sytems tight on space or when a lot of
packages might be removed:

1.- minimal upgrade
2.- upgrade the kernel and udev
3.- reboot
4.- do full upgrade

The first one allows for the downgrade, although I'm not so sure about
the second one. I would need to test it out.

Regars

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinu03o+uenbhk-8foquzzwgst=mzxw7b439g...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Request for updated info on d-i for the Release Notes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2010/10/16 Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña j...@computer.org:
 I have used this information to prepare the text for the Release Notes.
 It should be available in the next few hours in
 http://www.debian.org/releases/testing/i386/release-notes/ch-installing.en.html

I'm sorry, it looks like there is some build issues with the RN. While
we sort them out please look at the SVN sources. Full list of changes
introduced can be found at
http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/installing.dbk?r1=6859view=log

I will probably introduce Christian's information about available
languages in d-i this evening.

Regards

Javier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikerhfv7jyzcxvmgyfo7dru2m5vghk0uz=k3...@mail.gmail.com

Request for updated info on d-i for the Release Notes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hello there d-i team  friends,

We are in the process of revamping the Release Notes for the Squeeze
release and one of the chapters in need of review/update is the
Installation System chapter [1]. This chapter should list the new
features of the d-i system for this specific release. However, the
current content is specific to the Lennny release and needs to be
fully reviewed.

Browsing the Debian Installer Goals for Squeeze in the wiki [2] I can
get a feeling of some of the most relevant changes, but it would help
if the specific goals that have been met and change the user
experience (from previous d-i versions) is detailed. I would
appreciate if you could provide the following:

- a list of new features not available in the previous release
- a list of features that were available in the previous release that
are no longer available now
- a list of the new languages available for the d-i since the last
release (if any) or languages that have been dropped

Some of these we can find by comparing the d-i manual from Lenny to
Squeeze. For example, alpha or arm are no longer a supported arches in
d-i, and support for some flavors/platforms/subarchitectures (mainly
in mips and arm?) has changed too.

However, it would help the Release Notes editors a lot if the d-i team
provided a detailed description of this information.

If you can, it might be also useful to know which of the features
previous available in the Lenny release in d-i are no longer supported
or have changed dramatically as that might be relevant for the upgrade
process. That is, what will happen if a user installed Lenny with
feature X which is no longer supported in Squeeze and he upgrades from
one release to the other one.

Finally, you might want to summarise the information and use it to
also update the NewInSqueeze information in the wiki [3] related to
the Debian installer.


Thanks for your help!


Javier


[1] You can read it online for the i386 arch in
http://www.debian.org/releases/testing/i386/release-notes/ch-installing.en.html#inst-auto
(there are few arch-dependant stuff IIRC)

[2] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/SqueezeGoals

[3] http://wiki.debian.org/NewInSqueeze


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikgrrynqp_hxj248vu4yk9dclma-4hcvbd9e...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Documetation gap

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2009/7/26 Lee Winter lee.j.i.win...@gmail.com:
 Dear Debian Documentation,

Dear Lee,

I agree with you that the state of some documentation could be
improved. On your offer:

- If you want to provide new documentation, by all means, you can
start writing it and sharing it with the Debian community. We
currently hold all^Wmost of the DDP documentation at the DDP SVN [1]
and, from there, have it built and published at the Debian website,
along the other documentation. Notice that the pages at www.debian.org
already have pointers to documentation (HOWTOs, FAQs...) maybe those
should be reviewed too.

- For the link farm, this infrastructure could be hold at the WWW CVS.
For the time being, if you can submit patches or new (wml) pages for
the Website to add valuable documentation links, by all means, do so.

In either case, please use the BTS whenever possible (WWW related
enhacements/bugs should be sent to the www.debian.org virtual
package).

Thanks for your help in improving debian documentation!

Javier


[1] http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/ddp/manuals/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: CfH: Some issues regarding the lenny release notes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2009/2/2 W. Martin Borgert deba...@debian.org:
 0. Credits

   I added some author and translator names to the file
   en/release-notes.dbk. If your name or the name of your
   favourite contributor is not yet in, please just patch the
   file. If the existing information is inaccurate, patch it.
   Maybe we can also remove some names, which do not apply to
   the current state anymore.

In my opinions translators should only appear in the relevant
translation document, not in all languages. Having, for eg, the
bielorussian's translators name in the spanish translation of the
Release Notes does not make sense. Maybe it should be best to have
something like:
# TRANSLATORS: Please introduce here the name of the people
# you want to credit both for current and past translations
msgid The translation teams for each of their respective languages
msgstr 

And have translation teams introduce in the translation whatever they
feel appropiate. I'm not sure how the 'hidden

Also, either all credits should have email addresses or none should,
doing a mix of some do, some don't looks odd.

Just my 2c

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Please proof-read Debian 5.0 (lenny) release notes

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2009/1/26 W. Martin Borgert deba...@debian.org:
 We don't
 want to make translators lives even harder, don't we?

Quite sincerely, after the reports I've seen in the BTS, as well as in
replies to this request which affect *content* and not *wording* it
really looks like the release notes are not ready for prime time and
that the call for translation updates should have been hold.
Translators are going to suffer *a*lot* because of this last minute
changes.

I am in the process of reviewing Lenny's release notes' translations
to Spanish and I have been quite surprised when I found that there are
many things in them which refer to a sarge - etch release which are
not any more relevant in lenny.

Has anyone done test upgrades from one distribution to the other
(using different default installs: bare installation, desktop,
server..) to try to see which of the steps described in the release
notes is no longer relevant? I did many of those two years ago for the
etch release and reviewed the RN based on that experience. It looks
like this has not been done by any of the (current) editors of the
Release Notes.


Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#510324: release-notes: Upgrades of Desktop systems should not happen from within X11

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2009/1/27 W. Martin Borgert deba...@debian.org:
 On 2008-12-31 14:38, Sam Morris wrote:
 Package: release-notes
 Severity: normal

 Due to #495257, the user's desktop session will crash/freeze/misbehave if the
 dbus package is upgraded while they are logged in.

 The release notes should recommend that GNOME users (and users of KDE and 
 other
 desktop environments that use dbus) log out, then login on tty1, and perform
 the upgrade from a text-mode console in order to avoid problems.

 Could you please provide a short text? (Patch prefered.) Thanks!

If I'm not mistaken this is already covered in 4.1.4 Prepare a safe
environment for the upgrade:
http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#s-upgrade_preparations

Maybe the 'should' to be changed to a 'must' and a footnote could be
added describing this issue. Also, the section 4.1.2 Inform users in
advance could be changed to describe that users running a X11 session
will not be able to work and all users in that situation should be
asked to log out from their X sessions (remote or local).

Regards

Javier

PD: Is there a way to make gdm/kdm block out users from login in
through an upgrade through the use of a banner text? If so, that could
be recommended too.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#510324: release-notes: Upgrades of Desktop systems should not happen from within X11

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

 If I'm not mistaken this is already covered in 4.1.4 Prepare a safe
 environment for the upgrade:
 http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#s-upgrade_preparations

Sorry that URL should have been:
http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#upgrade-preparations

Regards

Javier



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Is manpages.debian.net still updated?

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2008/9/25 Hideki Yamane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hi,

  At manpages.debian.net, I find out jd which package I maintain,
  but only Sorry, no data found for `jd'. is diplayed.

Maybe the mirror that manpages.debian.net runs with is not
updtodate... or there is a problem with the scripts.

  Is there any pseudo package for BTS?

No, as it is not an official service.

I will try to take a look at it when time permits (but time is too
short these days...)

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Converting debian-doc CVS repo to SVN

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2008/6/16 Jens Seidel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 There where *never* many build errors. There are nevertheless a few:

 securing-howto: Spanish translation
  Outdated. Undefined label references

The Spanish translation can be disabled, it is not fully up to date.
It can be reenabled when the Spanish team provides me with the latest
version.

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: doc-debian 3.1.6 without the FAQ content (was: Re: working on Debian FAQ for shipping with lenny [...])

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2008/4/1, Joost van Baal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 I plan to create

  manuals/doc-debian/debian/rules
  manuals/doc-debian/doc/Makefile

Ummm.. I'm not convinced that doc-debian should be under 'manuals'.
The documentation content of doc-debian is actually not part of it,
it's mostly part of the web pages, so it makes no sense putting that
content in SVN. Putting the package build stuff in SVN does make
sense, however...

Why not in a root-dir packages/, aside with manuals/ which would hold
packages handled by the DDP team but which do *not* include
documentation?

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: working on Debian FAQ for shipping with lenny: new package debian-faq (was: Re: doc-debian [...] ready for upload? [...])

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

2008/3/31, Joost van Baal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hi Javier,

  Do you have time to upload a doc-debian package without the FAQ content
  within a couple of weeks?  Or would you rather have me prepare such a
  thing?

Sure, I can handle that. Just let me know when you've finished and I
will take care of the upload.

BTW, we should not ship contents of translations if they are *way* too
out of date.

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: New manpages CGI interface available (beta test)

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

It's fully working now. Enjoy!

A few quirks I've already noticed:

* The Section index uses 'apropos' directly and can be quite
CPU-consuming for some sections which contain quite a lot of manpages.
I might look into having these be generated staticly instead of
dynamicly.

* For some reason looking for 'apt' in 'all sections' does not turn up
anything but searching for it in section 8 does.

* Some manpages in the listings are showing indented, I believe this
is because of bugs in the manpages themselves, but have to check.

* Highlighting of manpages that contain a '_' in their name does not
work. I will need to fix the regular expression which handles those.

Ah. And  I forgot to mention that if in the distribution there are
multiple packages that provide a manual package with has the same name
in them you will only be able to get one of those, (which one
precisely depends on the binary package names and the script that sets
up the MANPATH). This happens, for example, for lpr(1).

Regards

Javier


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

CVS access for Spanish documentation proyect

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena]

There has been work being done recently by a spanish group on 
documentation, aside
from the DDP proyect (that is, they are not translating, they are making *new* 
documents in
spanish). The group's name is La Espiral and, in order to avoid what has 
happened with many
Redhat-based spanish distributions (which are not officially recognised by 
RedHat and thus
duplicate efforts because they are basicly doing the same), and to not have 
them work like the
debian-jp guys did at first (but later integrated on Debian), I would like to 
ask, on behold
of them, for CVS access to cvs.debian.org:/cvs/debian-doc/spanish/laespiral.
I think Debian should support any other proyects this way, but I think 
it's better to
do this, than to make them look for resources (like sourceforge) which would 
make that their
contributions have some chance of being forgotten (since they first have to 
contribute there
and then back to the Debian proyect).
I have also asked for a mailing list (debian-laespiral) for them to 
communicate (they
currently use their own mail server+maillist manager, but prefer not to 
maintain this kind of
resources).
What do you guys think? Is it a problem giving limited access a CVS 
directory inside
the DDP proyect?

Oh! And I forgot, all their work is available online at 
http://www.laespiral.org

Best regards

Javi

PD: Mi intention is to make some of these guys apply soon as Debian 
maintainers, I would not
like the proyect to fork from Debian, but to keep it *inside* Debian.


pgpVezse2l3Fe.pgp
Description: PGP signature