Since DEPENDENCIES hasn't been written up in a Gentoo-friendly manner,
and since the Exherbo documentation doesn't seem to suffice to explain
the idea here, here's some more details on the DEPENDENCIES proposal.
We observe that a typical package will have something like this:
DEPEND=
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:45:59 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
Since DEPENDENCIES hasn't been written up in a Gentoo-friendly manner,
and since the Exherbo documentation doesn't seem to suffice to explain
the idea here, here's some more details on the DEPENDENCIES
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:29:41 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Here's the important bit, which I shall prefix with some stars:
*** The point of DEPENDENCIES is not to replace n variables with one
*** variable.
Yes, it is.
You've clearly either completely missed the point of
Hello,
The release of a new major GStreamer 1.0 release is going to happen
soon. It will be parallel-installable with the 0.10 series, so it will
be eventually introduced as a separate SLOT and co-exist for a while.
As such, if you maintain any packages that have any dependencies on
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:36:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
These are the rules for a machine. People don't actually read
dependencies sequentially. Provide a good algorithm which works from
any position.
Read backwards from the current position until you find
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:23:16 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:36:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
These are the rules for a machine. People don't actually read
dependencies sequentially. Provide a good algorithm which works
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 10:50:40 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/09/12 07:45 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[ Snip! ] Note also how the foo-related things, the bar-related
things etc cannot be grouped together by their fooness or
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 15:53:50 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:23:16 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 13:36:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
These are the rules for a machine.
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:02:57 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
The problem is that you're arguing against a proposal that doesn't
exist except in your head. If you'd like to read and understand the
proposal being made, which starts with understanding the bits marked
clearly with
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:07:54 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:02:57 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
The problem is that you're arguing against a proposal that doesn't
exist except in your head. If you'd like to read and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
(Just for the record, I don't care about the merits or demerits of
*DEPEND or DEPENDENCIES.)
Ah, I forgot how the goals change *everything*. Because it's good
to kill hundreds of people for the good reasons.
You might want to take a short break to
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can reach consensus
about '*DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES'; a possibility to get people used to it
could be to have two parallel EAPIs, like 6 and 6-dependencies, where
the former will keep the old style and the latter use DEPENDENCIES.
After some time
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can reach consensus
about '*DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES'; a possibility to get people used to
it could be to have two parallel EAPIs, like 6 and 6-dependencies,
where the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 12:03 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300 Alexis Ballier
aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can reach
consensus about '*DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES'; a possibility to get
On 9/7/12 5:46 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can reach consensus
about '*DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES'
I also like at least significant parts of the DEPENDENCIES concept,
especially when we start adding more dep variables like HDEPEND.
My understanding
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
For example, what is the HDEPEND equivalent for DEPENDENCIES ? exherbo
documentation doesn't seem to mention an equivalent label.
DEPENDENCIES is essentially independent of what label names we
introduce. I get the
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 12:03 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300 Alexis Ballier
aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:28:31 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
An intermediate form of that might be useful for auditing the tree and
finding packages which aren't expressing, e.g. RDEPENDS, but probably
should.
RDEPEND=DEPEND was removed in EAPI 4, if that's what you mean.
--
Ciaran
On 9/7/12 6:03 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Why the dev community only? We have many active contributors who aren't
devs and who work hard with ebuilds. It's *their* time which will be
wasted on rewriting dependencies into new form, not yours.
Should those contributors also vote? Do they have any
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 18:12:08 +0200
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. phajdan...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 9/7/12 5:46 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can reach
consensus about '*DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES'
I also like at least significant parts of the DEPENDENCIES
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 18:40:47 +0200
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. phajdan...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, requiring a rewrite of all existing ebuilds doesn't sound like a
good idea. I think this should be designed not to require a rewrite,
and then the concern about wasted time disappears.
Uh, there is no
On 09/07/2012 09:10 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
For example, what is the HDEPEND equivalent for DEPENDENCIES ? exherbo
documentation doesn't seem to mention an equivalent label.
DEPENDENCIES is essentially
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46 -0700
Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
If you're insinuating that Portage may not have a
fully-ROOT-and-/-aware resolver, then I can assure you that this is
not a problem.
In that case, why do we need HDEPEND at all?
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 12:58 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46 -0700 Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org
wrote:
If you're insinuating that Portage may not have a
fully-ROOT-and-/-aware resolver, then I can assure you that
this is not a
On 06-09-2012 09:25:53 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
#1 - there is both a specification, and an initial implementation, AND
a fork of the tree that is kept semi-up-to-date on my dev overlay.
I was interested in a (formal) specification, not a proof of concept.
#2 - related to your question
On 09/07/2012 09:58 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46 -0700
Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
If you're insinuating that Portage may not have a
fully-ROOT-and-/-aware resolver, then I can assure you that this is
not a problem.
In that case, why do we need HDEPEND
All,
mgorny opened up a bug[1], which requests for all eclasses that use the
'prefix' USE-flag to be fixed to add 'prefix' to IUSE.
While the 'prefix' USE-flag has since its introduction belonged to that
group of USE-flags that are not supposed to be set by the user
him/herself, it is not
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:51 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can reach
consensus about '*DEPEND vs DEPENDENCIES'; a possibility to get
people used to
On 09/07/2012 10:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 12:58 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46 -0700 Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org
wrote:
If you're insinuating that Portage may not have a
fully-ROOT-and-/-aware resolver, then I can assure you that
this is not a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 01:13 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 06-09-2012 09:25:53 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
#1 - there is both a specification, and an initial
implementation, AND a fork of the tree that is kept
semi-up-to-date on my dev overlay.
I was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/07/2012 10:13 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
Could you give an example where implicit ${PV} as sub-slot would
not do what you need?
Can you point out a package for which SONAME/ABI/whatever changes
every time ${PV} changes? Probably not. Is the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 01:40 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 10:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 12:58 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46 -0700 Zac Medico
zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
If you're insinuating that Portage may
On 07-09-2012 10:52:10 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 10:13 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
Could you give an example where implicit ${PV} as sub-slot would
not do what you need?
Can you point out a package for which SONAME/ABI/whatever changes
every time ${PV} changes? Probably not. Is
On 07-09-2012 13:51:24 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 01:13 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 06-09-2012 09:25:53 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
#1 - there is both a specification, and an initial
implementation, AND a fork of the tree that is kept
semi-up-to-date on my dev overlay.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/07/2012 10:58 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 01:40 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 10:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 12:58 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46 -0700 Zac Medico
zmed...@gentoo.org
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:40:25 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:51 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
I actually do like the concept but I'm not sure we can
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 13:58:00 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 01:40 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 10:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 12:58 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 09:53:46
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/07/2012 11:18 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 10:58 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 01:40 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 10:02 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 07/09/12 12:58 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:17:17 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
Eh, no. Now it just always breaks when you perform a downgrade, and
revdev-rebuild or @preserved-libs won't help you. I prefer that you
give best practices how to use sub-slots to make Portage also able to
do a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 11:18:28 -0700
Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
In the linked chromium-os-dev discussion, the consensus seemed to be
that migrating deps from DEPEND to HDEPEND would result in fewer
overall changes than migrating deps from
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:32:12 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
mgorny opened up a bug[1], which requests for all eclasses that use
the 'prefix' USE-flag to be fixed to add 'prefix' to IUSE.
Please do not suggest that I am the one requesting this to be fixed.
I just have opened the
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:23:23 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
I can't agree unless I am missing something. Doesn't the majority of
ebuilds actually require most of DEPEND (well, the part common with
RDEPEND) to be installed on the target? I'm thinking of the shared
libraries mostly.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 02:17 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
No, not a GLEP, per se. I'm trying to understand what sub-slot
does and is. I think I'm starting to understand now. However, for
this feature to be added to an EAPI, IMO it would be nice if there
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:31:16 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:23:23 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
I can't agree unless I am missing something. Doesn't the majority of
ebuilds actually require most of DEPEND (well, the part common
On 07-09-2012 19:21:57 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:17:17 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
Eh, no. Now it just always breaks when you perform a downgrade, and
revdev-rebuild or @preserved-libs won't help you. I prefer that you
give best practices how
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:46:48 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Now, let me remind you because you probably fail to know the world
outside your dreamworld:
(with HDEPEND/DEPEND) generally mean that we would need to
s/DEPEND/HDEPEND/ for the vast majority of ebuilds (ie all the
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:49:35 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07-09-2012 19:21:57 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:17:17 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
Eh, no. Now it just always breaks when you perform a downgrade,
and revdev-rebuild
On 07-09-2012 14:39:38 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
I guess maybe i'm not following your example. To spell it out better,
here's what I'm understanding:
bar-1.0 has (prior to slot-operators) an RDEPEND=app-cat/libfnord.
No version specified. As such, it'll build successfully against
On 09/07/2012 11:17 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
No, not a GLEP, per se. I'm trying to understand what sub-slot does and
is. I think I'm starting to understand now. However, for this feature
to be added to an EAPI, IMO it would be nice if there are resources that
make it for most developers
On 07-09-2012 19:55:53 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
It appears slot-operator-deps do have some resemblance with ABI here
(especially if :* would be written in PMS such that it only allows
upgrades, no downgrades), but sub-slots are completely unrelated.
Downgrades are a different,
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:52:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:46:48 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Now, let me remind you because you probably fail to know the world
outside your dreamworld:
(with HDEPEND/DEPEND) generally
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:11:22 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:52:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:46:48 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Now, let me remind you because you probably fail to know
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:13:19 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:11:22 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:52:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:46:48 +0200
On 07-09-2012 12:03:16 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 11:17 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
I guess real-life examples, more extensively described than you did
before, with exactly where it goes wrong, and how the situation is
improved would help.
Perhaps some of the greatest
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:21:42 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
So... what is your issue in here, sir?
The issue is what Zac, Ian and I were discussing, before you jumped in
and started yelling. Repeating it for you:
We want to know, for dependencies that are in DEPEND and not RDEPEND,
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:25:22 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
I like that! Kudos for making it work!
I just wonder what the heck that has to do with SLOT.
The correct fix for not needing to rebuild stuff is to SLOT libraries
like crazy, and have a SLOT per
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 02:46 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 19:31:16 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:23:23 +0200 Michał Górny
mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
I can't agree unless I am missing
On 07-09-2012 20:36:02 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
The correct fix for not needing to rebuild stuff is to SLOT libraries
like crazy, and have a SLOT per thing-we-don't-call-ABI. This then
needs := dependencies, so that packages can say and remember which
SLOT I was built against.
However,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 03:25 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 07-09-2012 12:03:16 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/07/2012 11:17 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
I guess real-life examples, more extensively described than you
did before, with exactly where it goes
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:21:03 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:40:25 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:51 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:46:41 -0300
Alexis Ballier
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:25:58 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:21:42 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
So... what is your issue in here, sir?
The issue is what Zac, Ian and I were discussing, before you jumped in
and started
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 02:52 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:46:48 +0200 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org
wrote:
Now, let me remind you because you probably fail to know the
world outside your dreamworld:
(with HDEPEND/DEPEND) generally
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:59:48 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:21:03 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:40:25 -0300
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:03:51 +0200
Michał Górny
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 04:10 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:59:48 -0300 Alexis Ballier
aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:21:03 +0200 Michał Górny
mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:40:25 -0300 Alexis Ballier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:08:53 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
Bringing it back to the issue it's solving:
Afaict, for migration:
- - DEPEND changes to HDEPEND
If we're going by Chromium, AFAICS they're only making this change when
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 22:07:30 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:25:58 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 21:21:42 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
So... what is your issue in here, sir?
The issue is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/12 04:14 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:08:53 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius
a...@gentoo.org wrote:
Bringing it back to the issue it's solving:
Afaict, for migration:
- - DEPEND changes to HDEPEND
If we're going by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:28:40 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
- - the new DEPEND now will be used for things that are
*currently* in RDEPEND and DEPEND (so that things will work) but
are not actually run-time dependencies. Said
On 9/6/2012 5:56 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 06/09/12 03:55 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Thu, 06 Sep 2012, Gregory M Turner wrote:
${ROOT:=/} EPREFIX=@GENTOO_PORTAGE_EPREFIX@
EROOT=${ROOT}${EPREFIX}
When ROOT is undefined or empty, this script will assign //foo
to EROOT and bad things
On 09/07/2012 01:50 PM, Gregory M. Turner wrote:
Indeed, most ebuilds do this correctly although occasionally I've seen
exceptions. My overlay is for Prefix so it lucks out if ebuild
authors forget this and add the slash; but if/when non-prefix cygwin
support is resuscitated in Gentoo, all of
On 09/07/2012 07:45 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Since DEPENDENCIES hasn't been written up in a Gentoo-friendly
manner, and since the Exherbo documentation doesn't seem to suffice
to explain the idea here, here's some more details on the
DEPENDENCIES proposal.
It seems to me that the problem
On 09/07/12 19:45, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Since DEPENDENCIES hasn't been written up in a Gentoo-friendly manner,
and since the Exherbo documentation doesn't seem to suffice to explain
the idea here, here's some more details on the DEPENDENCIES proposal.
There's change, and there's progress.
72 matches
Mail list logo
