Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On Mon, 13 May 2013 00:24:09 +0200 Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 13/05/13 00:21, Peter Stuge wrote: > > There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it > > is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted, > > then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are > > enforced for all external contributions. That does not scale at > > all. > > Users can still send patches via email even if the project is hosted > on GitHub. And for the record I have not had problems with messy > merges when commiting pull requests. Once I was asked if I could look into a package. I spent a day writing a couple of ebuilds including fixing the build system of the target package. When I presented a first git-format-patch I was ask to do a github pull request instead. So I asked why not git-am? The answer was - don't be a *beep*. As a result the package never got fixed and I outright ignore any repo not hosted on Gentoo infra.
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in mail-client/claws-mail: ChangeLog claws-mail-3.9.1.ebuild
On 13/05/13 07:46, Christian Faulhammer (fauli) wrote: fauli 13/05/13 04:46:01 Modified: ChangeLog claws-mail-3.9.1.ebuild Log: move libnotify usage over to notification, forgotten in last commit - $(use_enable libnotify notification-plugin) + $(use_enable notification notification-plugin) Why deviate from every other ebuild in Portage? From global to local :-/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On 12 May 2013 20:34, Markos Chandras wrote: [...] > Besides, most fixes come from users (maybe not the actual patches but > they spot most of the problems) so providing an easier way for them to > contribute is preferred. Moreover, github provides other facilities Is it easier because they already have github accounts or ...? > such as code reviews, which the Gentoo's gitolite interface does not have. GNOME and others provide Splinter as a review system on bugzilla. Coupled with git bz, that should make the patch submission + review process comparably simple. Thoughts? Cheers, -- Arun Raghavan http://arunraghavan.net/ (Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Imprecise dependency specification causing problems with cave
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Taahir Ahmed wrote: > It should be noted that the first position (that the dependencies specified in > the ebuilds are not sufficient) is the position of cave's developers. I tend > to agree -- How is cave to know that there hasn't been a brekaing change in a > library's API? If a dependency does not specify a version then any version of that package must be able to satisfy the dependency. That certainly sounds like it is the case with the examples you cited. That doesn't mean that you can simply replace foo-1 with foo-2 and not have stuff break - it might require some rebuilding. Certainly a package with a := slot-operator dependency should be considered likely to break if the dependency changes subslots. How exactly cave handles these situations is up to its maintainers. I'd think that they should gracefully handle subslot changes since EAPI5 finally has enough information to take care of this (more or less). For pre-EAPI5 packages I could see why they'd keep the old versions around to avoid breaking linkage, but that is an implementation decision. Keep in mind that even if the dependency is EAPI5 it might have reverse dependencies that do not specify subslot operator dependencies in which case a package manager can't be sure how to handle things. If you have even a single package which does not give a subslot operator then the package manager can't be sure what will happen if the old version is removed. The behavior of emerge is to rebuild if there is a subslot operator dependency, keep the old lib around while unmerging it if preserve-libs is enabled until it is no longer referenced, or just break stuff if neither of those is the case. That certainly isn't the only way to do things. Rich
[gentoo-dev] Imprecise dependency specification causing problems with cave
I've recently switched to using cave (part of the paludis project) as the package manager for my system. It's more conservative than emerge in some instances, specifically when it comes to bare dependencies (DEPENDS or RDEPENDS that are un-versioned). For example: * The ebuild for virtual/linux-sources has as part of its RDEPEND "sys- kernel/gentoo-sources". I have several versions of "sys-kernel/gentoo- sources" installed on my system, and cave will not let me uninstall the older ones. Because the dependency is unversioned, cave's point of view is that it can't be sure that it doesn't actually depend on some specific features of the currently-installed atoms. * The ebuild for "app-office/calligra" has "media-libs/openexr" as a conditional RDEPEND. The latest version of "media-libs/openexr" is in a subslot "0/20", so cave wants to keep the older version to satisfy calligra's dependencies. In both of these cases, after reading the ebuild to verify that nothing should break beyond being fixed by "cave fix-linkage" (analogous to "revdep- rebuild"), I can instruct cave to ignore the conflicts it perceives and proceed. When I come across such a situation, should I submit a patch for the ebuild in question to specify the acceptable slots and versions for the DEPENDS and RDEPENDS (both of my examples are EAPI=5, so the slot specifier := can be used)? Or are these ebuilds correct and cave in the wrong? It should be noted that the first position (that the dependencies specified in the ebuilds are not sufficient) is the position of cave's developers. I tend to agree -- How is cave to know that there hasn't been a brekaing change in a library's API? Thanks, Taahir Ahmed
[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2013-05-12 23h59 UTC
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2013-05-12 23h59 UTC. Removals: gnome-extra/gnome-lirc-properties 2013-05-07 18:57:27 cardoe dev-python/python-selinux 2013-05-07 19:22:18 swift kde-base/printer-applet 2013-05-08 22:03:41 johu kde-base/system-config-printer-kde 2013-05-08 22:06:35 johu dev-libs/dvacm4 2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-zero dev-libs/dvnet 2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-zero dev-libs/dvssl 2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-zero dev-libs/dvthread 2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-zero dev-libs/dvutil 2013-05-09 09:49:01 dev-zero sys-kernel/mkinitcpio 2013-05-11 16:05:19 ssuominen sys-kernel/mkinitcpio-nfs-utils 2013-05-11 16:05:20 ssuominen kde-misc/libkfbapi 2013-05-12 16:51:10 johu Additions: sci-misc/repsnapper 2013-05-06 11:00:14 slis app-text/libodfgen 2013-05-06 11:43:33 scarabeus sci-libs/nfft 2013-05-06 15:24:57 ottxor media-gfx/svg2rlg 2013-05-08 04:56:14 yac sys-kernel/genkernel-next 2013-05-08 05:54:54 lxnay app-leechcraft/lc-xtazy 2013-05-08 12:11:14 maksbotan www-apache/mod_auth_radius 2013-05-08 13:52:15 chainsaw dev-lua/luacrypto 2013-05-08 23:29:36 radhermit dev-ruby/ruby-webkit-gtk2013-05-09 01:42:14 naota dev-lua/lua-cjson 2013-05-09 02:50:56 radhermit games-arcade/commandergenius2013-05-09 12:29:33 hasufell dev-java/joda-convert 2013-05-09 15:00:54 tomwij dev-ruby/ruby-webkit-gtk2 2013-05-10 13:22:45 naota net-misc/pycnb 2013-05-10 16:27:00 yac sys-auth/polkit-pkla-compat 2013-05-11 13:42:15 ssuominen sys-apps/mount-gtk 2013-05-11 17:38:42 ssuominen dev-python/falcon 2013-05-11 20:49:15 rafaelmartins media-video/subotage2013-05-12 07:08:13 mgorny media-video/bashnapi2013-05-12 07:15:59 mgorny net-libs/libkfbapi 2013-05-12 16:43:23 johu dev-python/python-magic 2013-05-12 17:59:43 thev00d00 -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 Removed Packages: gnome-extra/gnome-lirc-properties,removed,cardoe,2013-05-07 18:57:27 dev-python/python-selinux,removed,swift,2013-05-07 19:22:18 kde-base/printer-applet,removed,johu,2013-05-08 22:03:41 kde-base/system-config-printer-kde,removed,johu,2013-05-08 22:06:35 dev-libs/dvacm4,removed,dev-zero,2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-libs/dvnet,removed,dev-zero,2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-libs/dvssl,removed,dev-zero,2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-libs/dvthread,removed,dev-zero,2013-05-09 09:49:00 dev-libs/dvutil,removed,dev-zero,2013-05-09 09:49:01 sys-kernel/mkinitcpio,removed,ssuominen,2013-05-11 16:05:19 sys-kernel/mkinitcpio-nfs-utils,removed,ssuominen,2013-05-11 16:05:20 kde-misc/libkfbapi,removed,johu,2013-05-12 16:51:10 Added Packages: sci-misc/repsnapper,added,slis,2013-05-06 11:00:14 app-text/libodfgen,added,scarabeus,2013-05-06 11:43:33 sci-libs/nfft,added,ottxor,2013-05-06 15:24:57 media-gfx/svg2rlg,added,yac,2013-05-08 04:56:14 sys-kernel/genkernel-next,added,lxnay,2013-05-08 05:54:54 app-leechcraft/lc-xtazy,added,maksbotan,2013-05-08 12:11:14 www-apache/mod_auth_radius,added,chainsaw,2013-05-08 13:52:15 dev-lua/luacrypto,added,radhermit,2013-05-08 23:29:36 dev-ruby/ruby-webkit-gtk,added,naota,2013-05-09 01:42:14 dev-lua/lua-cjson,added,radhermit,2013-05-09 02:50:56 games-arcade/commandergenius,added,hasufell,2013-05-09 12:29:33 dev-java/joda-convert,added,tomwij,2013-05-09 15:00:54 dev-ruby/ruby-webkit-gtk2,added,naota,2013-05-10 13:22:45 net-misc/pycnb,added,yac,2013-05-10 16:27:00 sys-auth/polkit-pkla-compat,added,ssuominen,2013-05-11 13:42:15 sys-apps/mount-gtk,added,ssuominen,2013-05-11 17:38:42 dev-python/falcon,added,rafaelmartins,2013-05-11 20:49:15 media-video/subotage,added,mgorny,2013-05-12 07:08:13 media-video/bashnapi,added,mgorny,2013-05-12 07:15:59 net-libs/libkfbapi,added,johu,2013-05-12 16:43:23 dev-python/python-magic,added,thev00d00,2013-05-12 17:59:43 Done.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:24:09AM +0200, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 13/05/13 00:21, Peter Stuge wrote: > > There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it > > is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted, > > then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are > > enforced for all external contributions. That does not scale at > > all. > > Users can still send patches via email even if the project is hosted on > GitHub. And for the record I have not had problems with messy merges > when commiting pull requests. You can also merge pull requests locally and format them however you like (including fast forward merges). GitHub automatically closes the PR when it's tip commit lands in the target branch. My major gripe with PRs is folks sometimes add lots of good details to the PR summary, and then have little one-line commit messages :p. If you can convince them to incorperate motivation, etc., in the commit messages, than the fact that code came in via a PR is irrelevant. Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Alexander Berntsen wrote: > > There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it > > is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted, > > then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are > > enforced for all external contributions. That does not scale at all. > > Users can still send patches via email even if the project is hosted > on GitHub. Of course, but 1. github users will not send email to a github project and 2. if pull requests are rejected then github is not the primary point of contact so then there is no problem. > And for the record I have not had problems with messy merges > when commiting pull requests. As I wrote: It works fine but doesn't scale; the mess is that you always get a merge commit, which is usually unneccessary for smaller contributions such as those from users, as opposed to larger ones spanning more commits and/or branches worked on over longer time from developers. //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 13/05/13 00:21, Peter Stuge wrote: > There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it > is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted, > then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are > enforced for all external contributions. That does not scale at > all. Users can still send patches via email even if the project is hosted on GitHub. And for the record I have not had problems with messy merges when commiting pull requests. - -- Alexander alexan...@plaimi.net http://plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlGQFokACgkQRtClrXBQc7WBzQD/YVkIfIUT/meLZOqXUxItU15v 34rmpFFrB7j5LM455oEA/0R6XCoMAWnaMd6t+6l3clnJKa0T0jt731B//qeTBY59 =G1bz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Alexander Berntsen wrote: > > [GitHub] enforces some particular workflow > > You keep saying this. What do you mean? I'll clarify! > A lot of projects (including Linux) just use GitHub for hosting and > nothing else. I don't see the problem. There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted, then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are enforced for all external contributions. That does not scale at all. (It works of course, but the repo history ends up looking horrible.) //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 12/05/13 20:24, Peter Stuge wrote: > [GitHub] enforces some particular workflow You keep saying this. What do you mean? A lot of projects (including Linux) just use GitHub for hosting and nothing else. I don't see the problem. - -- Alexander alexan...@plaimi.net http://plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlGQE8MACgkQRtClrXBQc7VatQD/U4JiZzXYNx8i7H3rs/dBmhkT QZkPS0LiysoCM1m8dtQBAJcZomDANi5HxzXxhTaVtW0zugLkXcSU8nXWlGLUuuZx =5mug -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] GitLab Feature-Set / Was: devmanual moved to github
[...] > > Another option that looks nice is GitLab. > > How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. Maybe, I can summarize it up a bit: - GitLab is a Ruby-On-Rails Application => Requires very few setup on a gentoo system: ruby, a webserver and a mysql or postgresl database and redis. Some gems. That's it mostly. - It makes use of a lot of the FOSS-Code which was written by GitHub. - Itself is licensed under the MIT-License. - It used to be based around the gitolite shell, but nowadays has it's own shell to implement access restrictions on the managed repositories. - Repositories can be private (to users or teams) or public with write-access granted to individuals or teams. => Up to here, it's just a way to manage multiple git repositories via http and access them via git://, ssh://, http:// and https:// It can be used just the same way a pure gitolite installation can be used. (Which by the way is true for any repository on github as well). On top of that: - It supports "Merge Requests", which are almost the same as PRs on Github, which allows user contributions to be reviewed quite easily. - It can trigger web-hooks in a similar way to github. It has some other nice features - but I personally believe they are not very relevant to gentoo: - Issue tracking per git repository - Wiki per git repository I am running an instance of gitlab for some of my private projects. The instance is accessed from roughly a dozen scripts and me. I run it including it's database (aside to some other services) on a VServer, which has 1 CPU assigned to it and 1 gigabyte of ram. Accessing it never appeared any slower to me than accessing github (even given that low hardware). Though, i have no data on how it scales to bigger environments. Updates to it are release on a once-per-month basis. Most of the time they are quite straight forward and installed in less than 5 minutes. The overall configure on the above mentioned hardware took me roughly 2 hours (sql, nginx, ruby etc being already emerged). This is mostly due to the fact gitlab's author mainly targets ubuntu. But it wasn't very hard to adapt the instructions to Gentoo w/ OpenRC. Hopefully these datapoints help to fill up some gaps :-) Sascha
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On 13/05/2013 04:24, Peter Stuge wrote: Michael Palimaka wrote: I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not. I agree, but if infra is not willing to maintain something java-based there's not much we can do about that. We (well you) could try to join infra. Infra? Nobody ever goes in, and nobody ever goes out. :-D Another option that looks nice is GitLab. How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. That's the point. :-) Ok, do you know if it also enforces some particular workflow like github does, or if there are knobs to twiddle? I haven't used it for anything useful, but there is a demo instance[1]. What sort of workflow do you feel is enforced by github? I haven't personally felt constrained by it in the past. [1]: http://demo.gitlab.com/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Michael Palimaka wrote: >> I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit >> for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does >> and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not. > > I agree, but if infra is not willing to maintain something java-based > there's not much we can do about that. We (well you) could try to join infra. >>> Another option that looks nice is GitLab. >> >> How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. > > That's the point. :-) Ok, do you know if it also enforces some particular workflow like github does, or if there are knobs to twiddle? //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Theo Chatzimichos wrote: > > > Another option that looks nice is GitLab. > > > > How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. > > Don't ask, just go for it! That's not very helpful? I'm happy to expand on my experience with Gerrit, and I'll gladly answer specific questions if I can. > It's a few steps to set up, but it's not too bad. Great! Have you run it in production or in a lab? Did you encounter any non-obvious issues? > I agree that github is sucky, but I don't think rejecting GitLab > just because it looks exactly like Github makes sense. Where did you get the idea that anyone is rejecting GitLab? Especially surprising that you think that *I* would reject GitLab, since I'm not even a developer. (Comparing github with Java doesn't make much sense.) > Look at what the application does and how it works first. Yes indeed, obviously I tried that, but the gitlab.org webpage doesn't have a lot of information beyond the github-like screenshots. Hence my question to the list, where perhaps someone can talk about gitlab based on their experience. All pointers to better resources are surely appreciated not only by me. //Peter pgpR0SLdYg_j4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites; dev-python/{etsdevtools,blockcanvas,envisagecore}
On Sunday 12 of May 2013 23:21:15 IAN DELANEY wrote: > # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) > # Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the > # package, no longer valid. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > dev-python/etsdevtools > > # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) > # Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the > # package, no longer valid. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > dev-python/blockcanvas > > # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) > # version 3 package now superseded by > # dev-python/envisage version 4. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > dev-python/envisagecore you need to sent the mail with your gentoo mail to reach gentoo-dev-announce signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On Sunday 12 of May 2013 19:20:03 Peter Stuge wrote: > Rich Freeman wrote: > > Gerrit > > .. > > I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just to > > start messing with it personally. > > Go for it! It's a few steps to set up, but it's not too bad. > > Michael Palimaka wrote: > > I believe Gerrit has been suggested before and rejected because it > > relies on Java, and ReviewBoard because it "sucks". > > I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit > for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does > and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not. > > > Another option that looks nice is GitLab. > > How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. Don't ask, just go for it! It's a few steps to set up, but it's not too bad. I agree that github is sucky, but I don't think rejecting GitLab just because it looks exactly like Github makes sense. Look at what the application does and how it works first. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On 13/05/2013 03:20, Peter Stuge wrote: I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not. I agree, but if infra is not willing to maintain something java-based there's not much we can do about that. Another option that looks nice is GitLab. How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. That's the point. :-)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Rich Freeman wrote: > Gerrit > .. > I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just to > start messing with it personally. Go for it! It's a few steps to set up, but it's not too bad. Michael Palimaka wrote: > I believe Gerrit has been suggested before and rejected because it > relies on Java, and ReviewBoard because it "sucks". I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not. > Another option that looks nice is GitLab. How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github. //Peter
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: > This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very > sad to witness this once again. I've nothing at all against mirroring the repository at github, or against accepting pull requests there. However, I think that we shouldn't rely on third-party servers running proprietary software for hosting important parts of our documentation. BTW, we had a very similar discussion two years ago about the PMS repository, where moving to github had been suggested, too. > I restored +w to g.o.g.o. Thank you. Ulrich
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On 13/05/2013 02:08, Rich Freeman wrote: Second, I think this really points to there being value for something like Gerrit available on Gentoo, which might be the best of both worlds. I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just to start messing with it personally. I'd be interested in whether anybody is familiar with it and doesn't feel that it is an appropriate tool for us to use. If the consensus is overwhelmingly positive then it would be great to have it deployed on Gentoo infra. And yes, I realize that this is easy to type, but hard work to implement. I see dual-workflows like Github as an interim solution. Personally, I'm not entirely opposed to even a Github-only solution as an interim if we were actively working on something FOSS-based, however I realize that not all might agree on that. Rich I am not 100% certain, but I believe Gerrit has been suggested before and rejected because it relies on Java, and ReviewBoard because it "sucks". Another option that looks nice is GitLab.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: > > > This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very > sad to witness this once again. > I have mixed feelings for this very reason. The concept of accepting contributions on github is an EXCELLENT one. The problem is that it is proprietary, which creates division, and could potentially create problems down the road (no way to know - the sorts of things that can happen anytime you depend on proprietary software). > I will take care of the github mirroring myself. For those who will > merge pull requests on github, please take extra care to resolve the > merges properly. > So, first, THANK YOU! Second, I think this really points to there being value for something like Gerrit available on Gentoo, which might be the best of both worlds. I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just to start messing with it personally. I'd be interested in whether anybody is familiar with it and doesn't feel that it is an appropriate tool for us to use. If the consensus is overwhelmingly positive then it would be great to have it deployed on Gentoo infra. And yes, I realize that this is easy to type, but hard work to implement. I see dual-workflows like Github as an interim solution. Personally, I'm not entirely opposed to even a Github-only solution as an interim if we were actively working on something FOSS-based, however I realize that not all might agree on that. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> However, the write access removed because of potential conflicts >> between g.o.g.o and github. If you can guarantee me that people will >> not mess things up and not commit only to one of the to remotes, >> then we can enable write access again. > > I for my part won't push anything to a devmanual repo hosted at > github. As this presumably means that I won't be able to contribute > any more, I've now removed myself from the devmanual mail alias. I am curious to know your reasoning here. I can understand wanting to keep an up-to-date copy on Gentoo infra, but I'm not so clear on the outright refusal to push to Github as well. Do you simply not wish to create an account there? Can you explain a bit more?
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/12/2013 04:48 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: > >>> Earlier you said: "Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to >>> deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo." > >>> Have I missed something? Last time I looked, github's server >>> software wasn't open source. Why should we use non-free tools >>> for a central piece of Gentoo documentation? > >> The repository is still accessible in >> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org and read-only access is still >> available. > > In what way is removing write access different from deprecating > the repository? > >> However, the write access removed because of potential conflicts >> between g.o.g.o and github. If you can guarantee me that people >> will not mess things up and not commit only to one of the to >> remotes, then we can enable write access again. > > I for my part won't push anything to a devmanual repo hosted at > github. As this presumably means that I won't be able to > contribute any more, I've now removed myself from the devmanual > mail alias. > > Ulrich > This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very sad to witness this once again. I restored +w to g.o.g.o. I will take care of the github mirroring myself. For those who will merge pull requests on github, please take extra care to resolve the merges properly. - -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRj7s9XxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzNTVDNDczOUYzRjJEMTRGNDRGMzU2RkMw OUJGNEY1NEMyQkE3RjNDAAoJEAm/T1TCun88pyAP/jIgt8P2s0Bpmus9AenfBWNn PsdjvxOu7Rs6YGq4tr9Ol4fFKD47BZIVdGHUlcRmbzcV3bB3YstqUHEFbtupvrEK umQrzsdUHkCDfejeA+v/Ggy3FdHHPeFphGI+W9BfMJZBYDFpcjl0Dt8YyKdPQTL6 Sy4Roo13nQsE9p3pJUVctprydNFcNGzULxA3fj0IcvXl6NxD/m4YSiEIgnQNUjT0 ee05OTcYvNX5RzyREsR/snERZExnfnNX9Bf8Z6yxQWNlAt5YlbCnLuk+6ye11x9P J6rynxehRtR7lvRb54xGBs1Ni6H2NcDGnWJZo6CcajWF40htx8XgkynoMsrujPCt lzKKrrQ0yO9d02GOLYaGwQ7IjgCUA10pON5G1QytPCqeLPOPDtnZjbh82eOpvghf HTooqVIBKf4U9gs2nY7s4Ky/39eB5Toi1xUD5jtayxiRLtotPZ7KKdNx98xyL4Fj JcLPisl5Y41/dPyGXJ6lW3KmDajry/oDrIKk7l1kcvtebUJGxnx3kYtrJRSmNciA pXGAYFtOXnACrAYj6mvJfilh5QT7PiO/r1XUbvwacAmKnhPRMsZnG3EtOKuOn/x8 pAnmgtoBy1EfGVuseSQJEe/hjQy2q7z/mcqYA0En1UAMgFRCyeuZNdtQE/lNLZy7 g6Xawl5NY7P0PNlJCN+F =7f1w -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: >> Earlier you said: "Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to >> deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo." >> Have I missed something? Last time I looked, github's server >> software wasn't open source. Why should we use non-free tools for a >> central piece of Gentoo documentation? > The repository is still accessible in http://git.overlays.gentoo.org > and read-only access is still available. In what way is removing write access different from deprecating the repository? > However, the write access removed because of potential conflicts > between g.o.g.o and github. If you can guarantee me that people will > not mess things up and not commit only to one of the to remotes, > then we can enable write access again. I for my part won't push anything to a devmanual repo hosted at github. As this presumably means that I won't be able to contribute any more, I've now removed myself from the devmanual mail alias. Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Richard Yao wrote: >> Last time I looked, github's server software wasn't open source. >> Why should we use non-free tools for a central piece of Gentoo >> documentation? > The last that I looked, the Verilog designs and other hardware > schematics were not open source either, but we depend on them anyway. > How is github different from any other hardware? I don't care about their hardware. At least parts of their software are proprietary, though. Ulrich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites; dev-python/{etsdevtools,blockcanvas,envisagecore}
On Sunday 12 of May 2013 23:21:15 IAN DELANEY wrote: > # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) > # Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the > # package, no longer valid. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > dev-python/etsdevtools > > # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) > # Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the > # package, no longer valid. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > dev-python/blockcanvas > > # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) > # version 3 package now superseded by > # dev-python/envisage version 4. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > dev-python/envisagecore
[gentoo-dev] Last rites; dev-python/{etsdevtools,blockcanvas,envisagecore}
# Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) # Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the # package, no longer valid. # Masked for removal in 30 days dev-python/etsdevtools # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) # Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the # package, no longer valid. # Masked for removal in 30 days dev-python/blockcanvas # Ian Delaney (12 May 2013) # version 3 package now superseded by # dev-python/envisage version 4. # Masked for removal in 30 days dev-python/envisagecore -- kind regards Ian Delaney
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Markos Chandras wrote: > The repository is still accessible in http://git.overlays.gentoo.org > and read-only access is still available. However, the write access > removed because of potential conflicts between g.o.g.o and github. > If you can guarantee me that people will not mess things up and not > commit only to one of the to remotes, then we can enable write access > again. It makes sense to only have one main repository, but I don't think it makes sense to make that github. > Besides, most fixes come from users (maybe not the actual patches but > they spot most of the problems) so providing an easier way for them to > contribute is preferred. Have you operated or used Gerrit? I think it's a really great tool to kill two birds with one stone; commits can be reviewed, iterated, accepted and rejected easily and all that is required to contribute (push a commit to Gerrit) is an OpenID and an SSH key. > Moreover, github provides other facilities such as code reviews, > which the Gentoo's gitolite interface does not have. It's easy to find reasons *against* something. I think it's more important to consider respective benefits. //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] devmanual moved to github
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/12/2013 04:02 PM, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 12 May 2013 21:27, Peter Stuge wrote: >> Rich Freeman wrote: The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. >>> >>> The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if >>> others feel strongly about it. >> >> I feel strongly against github. >> >> Making something like github the primary point of contact >> communicates many negative things for Gentoo IMO. >> >> On the technical level I think it's unneccessary and concretely >> unhelpful to limit a git repo workflow to the subset that github >> implements. >> >> I guess that Infra might also feel strongly about this. I hope >> Markos discussed the move with them already and that any concerns >> of theirs were understood. >> >> >> //Peter >> > > Just push to two remotes, like we have been doing for the qt > overlay. > > -- Cheers, > > Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki > admin > Yes but this works for Qt because the number of people with commit access is very small so we can "sort of" make sure they all have sane git configurations in place. However, with devmanual, we can't guarantee that all developers will bother to update their config files to push to two remotes. Can we? - -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRj7IjXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzNTVDNDczOUYzRjJEMTRGNDRGMzU2RkMw OUJGNEY1NEMyQkE3RjNDAAoJEAm/T1TCun88rDsQAJj/hgVMR69QQryRsxVQ1FV+ c/M4Olvv45iYijX8gvs7YWItp7QTCDCVf8pqOgwiIax8/eZiGJX7tQOVzGbDWcZ+ B2SnsvsxhFLQJdM+V4OChhEKxVjNWk16QUFOQBFazcav0xu1RaYk8wZVWMwoQQug 2z0SlL719+topu8VCfGJ+JgBOJyOrDAudFmiGdv9UgAK6H9zyLY5NDUOzOm90sKc jEbr/+77G+XIT6hRNO1UaBC2dYCJHWyambWvwO1ETslcj92CjXm2oCNU+MqQM8Lg bw8Si33ql0Fm44kbw1S1rKQu1WRocW7voPelsEZ/PihXjesvJStYw6otcmIALUQo qS2rk2ZufSfb6jVm9qVGepSwi4VIG8T/4Y4CpgLfVW/r5SzaF5ed2ByvqoeLPbx/ Op8iN8WBWdWhMXZ/kK3ZRyL2tVCa/mYVw3DyyuM8wUpqmI5to6ysV5DZ9lmCEZsV bFzxyeTTQjgxAVlpottzRGTKi8WkRSmKSZJMVjCPAtX5FR14C8W8SNa9fqgFfqXI 7Qet+mgY39g2PA7lv3ucMuyMgN/L0gTyKUxEY0mAa5CAUFZZ3KNL+LDGQag3eiVE +LwxO3SaoSwRWMWL51N0VdOPEuDsm8eRhQrP9NbkL20tYcLvjpXR16eAOBBJmhRS 658HbN1tfdvbq1PyX5A3 =datU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
On 05/12/2013 09:15 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: > >> The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your >> local trees using the following command: > >> Developers: git remote set-url origin >> g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > >> Read-only: git remote set-url origin >> git://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > > Earlier you said: "Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to > deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo." > > Have I missed something? Last time I looked, github's server software > wasn't open source. Why should we use non-free tools for a central > piece of Gentoo documentation? > > Ulrich > >> [1] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/devmanual.git;a=summary >> [2] https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > The last that I looked, the Verilog designs and other hardware schematics were not open source either, but we depend on them anyway. How is github different from any other hardware? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] devmanual moved to github
On 12/05/2013 14:27, Peter Stuge wrote: > I feel strongly against github. > > Making something like github the primary point of contact > communicates many negative things for Gentoo IMO. Oh heavens, for once I agree with Peter. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/12/2013 02:15 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: > >> The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update >> your local trees using the following command: > >> Developers: git remote set-url origin >> g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > >> Read-only: git remote set-url origin >> git://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > > Earlier you said: "Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to > deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo." > > Have I missed something? Last time I looked, github's server > software wasn't open source. Why should we use non-free tools for a > central piece of Gentoo documentation? > > Ulrich > >> [1] >> http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/devmanual.git;a=summary >> >> [2] https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > The repository is still accessible in http://git.overlays.gentoo.org and read-only access is still available. However, the write access removed because of potential conflicts between g.o.g.o and github. If you can guarantee me that people will not mess things up and not commit only to one of the to remotes, then we can enable write access again. Besides, most fixes come from users (maybe not the actual patches but they spot most of the problems) so providing an easier way for them to contribute is preferred. Moreover, github provides other facilities such as code reviews, which the Gentoo's gitolite interface does not have. - -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRj69qXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzNTVDNDczOUYzRjJEMTRGNDRGMzU2RkMw OUJGNEY1NEMyQkE3RjNDAAoJEAm/T1TCun88UEoP/005Z4Oabo5R0OpHI+wWEABx cRNkRqg9CJGqsyvPkO5ln94bYjpwgV/fg26snQOS3yFEO2E4PTBmXXkyWVYwhXZX NcBpqevFu0fTMt0p54zWq/zWse7rot/iZPcNeGtr/N6CV5lsrEjH+LjJpp3LMNfQ +WVgY2Iv3T7nmvCh4iSZbHYMar1vBVXLsDyxE2pGwcJauE5i7fZpVhx8f2Ma8tB3 yLObZh3Nx3v6IB6//lfWhytfF1QRpvHLgI5MsFjzVnWtRKenXnsFrApu+rUQPMR3 qIVzK+QjgLXxWbiT4CIs71utmamsJUvUhxvVOPJbVrz1JjO7bOolP+E7PlU7guu3 iARFcyOyHqzMxVLopgm7IKnrzKosBtp8r336pnJl+cTev3Xgrc6FMRUfkXeUPlFX rXP4MSGu1/Ab4tdVVakpa0KvXG8OCrPB/2bBCl7N5KRVYFpSQrGkkP/dAVupZTZh uPXnrqzHkRDcdTH0GN0L1/NmJe5IdsPCX7RFS28FOL/wEf6WIewOBZgTGvuNaahT mqONBO9VXGu2w4nQtCVK0lWfyNIsHB2nJyOKDtQZWuajbQYihkpS86IHhNMvS0aU v0qDs0yEkjpeSHb73T9xkDpN1amTo8l4IWmWz8vruPTZbjXldiBGGhgobM+K5tM2 auZWwWx3srwbl5aSZx1a =qF97 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
Rich Freeman posted on Sun, 12 May 2013 09:12:03 -0400 as excerpted: > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Markos Chandras > wrote: >> The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. > > No objections to mirroring it there, and accepting pull requests there. > However, would an outright move be contrary to our social contract? > [quoted] > > That said, git itself is FOSS, and moving it back is not difficult > should bad things happen (though any in-progress pull-requests/etc would > be lost). The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if > others feel strongly about it. To me it depends upon how dependent upon github people actually become. If the primary workflow remains in people's distributed git repos, in git, then more copies "out there" including on github is simply more redundancy, As Linus likes to say, "real men" don't make backups, they post it to the net and let the dozens (in his case, likely tens of thousands, but...) of net copies be their backups. As soon as github going down becomes a problem, however, or as soon as pull requests need to go thru github, then it's a problem, "depending upon" according to the social contract. Arguably, letting github be the primary/only public link is problematic in that very way, since at that point github going down is a problem for those using the public link. OTOH, just having a mirror there and letting people submit pull requests via github as well as directly, shouldn't be a problem. IMO of course. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] devmanual moved to github
On 12 May 2013 21:27, Peter Stuge wrote: > Rich Freeman wrote: >> > The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. >> >> The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if >> others feel strongly about it. > > I feel strongly against github. > > Making something like github the primary point of contact > communicates many negative things for Gentoo IMO. > > On the technical level I think it's unneccessary and concretely > unhelpful to limit a git repo workflow to the subset that github > implements. > > I guess that Infra might also feel strongly about this. I hope Markos > discussed the move with them already and that any concerns of theirs > were understood. > > > //Peter > Just push to two remotes, like we have been doing for the qt overlay. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
Re: [gentoo-dev] devmanual moved to github
Rich Freeman wrote: > > The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. > > The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if > others feel strongly about it. I feel strongly against github. Making something like github the primary point of contact communicates many negative things for Gentoo IMO. On the technical level I think it's unneccessary and concretely unhelpful to limit a git repo workflow to the subset that github implements. I guess that Infra might also feel strongly about this. I hope Markos discussed the move with them already and that any concerns of theirs were understood. //Peter
[gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github
> On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: > The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your > local trees using the following command: > Developers: git remote set-url origin > g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org > Read-only: git remote set-url origin > git://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org Earlier you said: "Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo." Have I missed something? Last time I looked, github's server software wasn't open source. Why should we use non-free tools for a central piece of Gentoo documentation? Ulrich > [1] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/devmanual.git;a=summary > [2] https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] devmanual moved to github
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: > The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. No objections to mirroring it there, and accepting pull requests there. However, would an outright move be contrary to our social contract?: However, Gentoo will never depend upon a piece of software or metadata unless it conforms to the GNU General Public License, the GNU Lesser General Public License, the Creative Commons - Attribution/Share Alike or some other license approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). That said, git itself is FOSS, and moving it back is not difficult should bad things happen (though any in-progress pull-requests/etc would be lost). The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if others feel strongly about it. Rich
[gentoo-dev] devmanual moved to github
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Good day, The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your local trees using the following command: Developers: git remote set-url origin g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org Read-only: git remote set-url origin git://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org [1] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/devmanual.git;a=summary [2] https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org - -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRj33iXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzNTVDNDczOUYzRjJEMTRGNDRGMzU2RkMw OUJGNEY1NEMyQkE3RjNDAAoJEAm/T1TCun88pb8P/0BcCueLazirOq7b1NN2cRWZ 6ak9RQczTF4SzHr6eJ+QBN+bGS2oH7CPqq8/h3f/NEkaPvZka6ujiehrwZW2zr6T oPXEaB7yP3or6VpkcG40yqI1GA2kbz+WbpnWCQAHpGmeaZZ6rzrvs+dWL7zqCKYS YEkUUjTbSaTudxe5wJ6rOZvpcIg3un45mQ/uesL8jrxTvKAk+5WPieHYeK6GViGF iRevNyhMAzYv4NQVel8U/3q3+4r4IugtOD+mWyuiLjAvw5FWaLQ0Ig0BAeaRszjb EkuQmEMz1NzIi/hmmihvdbQ2h+XpFfoQedBA9p7IfOcHVHEP6SW/m4DuiV/Fbxb3 7D+AaUskwip2BlNwxG9paCf+bwT5X3d4tsAh56JT6garQwuS/azT+g8fBpraHgU3 Fwb2ugpGJ59b10T0z5GJj5kbvs6ThfSs38F4C3DVFXl959LFS3HrA7ZIojK8LaYU hKtCqCIp+BjO6J28CUP2YL8Hv5QcqnB1F7Ixj1p+ELrDAKoEDyMcnHT1htC0CVRh PCfGatntNSGKFM8xd87vpBSG8SDifmEEK+L8vAKrK7dQQSERipl8/ggHJSKN4jbQ Slnj+TtmMAsPVW8Kri+3WNJ3fM6ov++IS6AebTTdMAMyOt8qfuUTAGXM9JRU1mv4 KcgpKzgjLlVMSLyyPpsQ =b5ru -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Last rites: dev-python/gdl-python
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 # Markos Chandras (12 May 2013) # Does not build. Dead upstream. Bug #467286 # Removal in 30 days dev-python/gdl-python - -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRj3KnXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQzNTVDNDczOUYzRjJEMTRGNDRGMzU2RkMw OUJGNEY1NEMyQkE3RjNDAAoJEAm/T1TCun88PSQP/3XNXgrwE++v40zCqGqx9X4g isFoYO+xDdZnp//TzsGOs0VQorVZ0Te1batHBmUnderftmej/GcoV+2Om8N1IvCa 1nEwo2CFdKdVLN7soVy8Tjp8+tfPwBD51SaRa7IKA3mqbHF9VTTXQb4Vkv4tU7Iq YbG9HJkGVlu8LHLRFDgcCDV4ZgqXNlRWI2YU7es7PLW2Yn6fdwqsZ88hSLAKWhJv GAcVHQPPMkl199wwTfHsGSzcH5Smcnh/1y/PIuM62ptSZnHk0MVnndtq9j0WlC15 ebsQ/k6ADif9vaT0ODIdvJASqncBUI8Ri132mt0g8XcU/5tC0z7q4toHLTzsRQrL dFZr/XVXbBs7+7XS3B6D2UCV7QuwqJ8U3AFXOQ5S3z8ab8ytwO2lK0UEnNXwH6s2 FU+rwJ32avaPehAi4isO+yxLNweVxjXgNe2asxLfxKHEIoAgRr++a7gJLbfBT2ka gLF+tkWy09ojG9F954rFqtQLXgKbaNUdszAOv76bRs8iT2ZhrMipOCOT+Eolnx25 kkMS/moeg5vAqUip5zxngc0LwN7e6f0YpCuRTuB8rTXtw1Q1KM7JZw3pmK/Gnf0N ijO3eSUw4yBwapLBlEeKULJlK+yAV8A8uP88SJd5OehE5YscpSDb3lx+3BRp3ZXU 8e6LMY2A+0sB6rHsRVci =3q2p -END PGP SIGNATURE-
