Bug#613832: Bug#61383Re: www.debian.org: Debian sister association in the merchandise page

[Stefano Zacchiroli]

[ Adding auditor@d.o to the list of recipients, as part of the issue
  here is where they'd like to maintain the list of trusted
  organizations. Auditors: all context is available in #613832 ]
[ Quoted text reordered ]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 05:27:35PM +0100, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
> Last but not least, at that point we would be obliged to list every Debian
> sisters (or to be correct Debian Trusted Organization): as the DPL (added in
> CC) said to me yesterday on IRC this kind of list already exists
> (http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Auditor/Organizations) and Debian Auditors take
> care of it. Adding it also in the merchandise page could turn out in
> unwanted duplication of information.
> 
> BTW, I think that the Debian Trusted Organization list deserves a specific
> place on the website as it's a very official page and important page.

Thanks Francesca for the Cc. It seems to me that there are two
intertwined aspects at stake. The first one is where to maintain the
list of trusted organizations as per constitution §5.1.11 and
§9.3. Maintaining that list is up to the auditors, according to the
current delegation.

I believe that Luk started doing that on the wiki just because it was
easier™ that way. Given that the list doesn't change that often, I
believe that once it's stable that list deserves a proper place on
www.d.o (do you want a bug report about that?). Considering how
important those organizations are for Debian, even a specific
per-organization sub-page might be warranted.

> Yes, I understand that debian.ch (and similar organisation, as Debian UK
> as you suggest) is a Debian sister (have an official status) AND give all
> proceeds to Debian Project.
> But, IMHO, for the specific purpose of the merchandise page (i.e. to inform
> users of existence of Debian merchandise vendors) the more relevant 
> information
> is the one about the destination of the proceeds (as you have stated in a
> previous mail user could be more happy to see that proceeds fully or partially
> goes to Debian).

The second issue is whether or not trusted organizations should be
blessed as "preferred" merchandise dealers in the merchandise page or
not. I've mixed feelings about that. My first answer used to be that
they should be, for two reasons: a) users do not need to trust an
"external" entity; b) buying from them users can help more Debian, in
the sense that all the money will be used for Debian goals (hardware,
sprints and the like).

> More important, there could be vendors who have not an official status but who
> give all proceeds to Debian (and the "the vendor is a Debian organisation"
> would be false and the categorization not exhaustive).

On a second though however, this argument of Francesca is quite
compelling. A hypothetical shop giving all its income on Debian
merchandise to Debian fully satisfies point (b) above.

It still does not address point (a) above though and we also risk that
they only *claim* to give proceeds to Debian.

All in all, I believe that *mentioning* in the merchandise page that
entities like debian.ch are trusted organizations of the Debian project
won't hurt. It will account for more transparency on who-is-who and will
also address (a) for users who care about it. The mention can come as a
note, as a new boolean column and in the future as a link to the www.d.o
sub-page describing the trusted organization in question.

Regarding the sorting of merchandise vendors, it would be nice to sort
them according to which percentage of merchandise they give back to
Debian (higher percentage first). That would be a fair criteria, useful
to Debian finances.

Cheers.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, |  .  |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Another database error?

[Simon Paillard]

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 04:16:22PM +0100, iwantU2brich iwantU2brich wrote:
> I was searching for :
> 
> linux-image-2.6.37-trunk,
> 
> "Error No such package."
> on this 
> site
> 
> Is there an error or there is no such package?

There is no such package.

> Month ago or less I was searching and installing this kernel and there it
> was in your repository, please answer me if you can.

Then search "2.6.37" and you will find it's available in sid:
http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=all&arch=i386&searchon=names&keywords=2.6.37

-- 
Simon Paillard


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110219121024.gh6...@glenfiddich.ikibiki.org

Re: To report a problem with the web site

[Simon Paillard]

Hi,

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 02:44:18PM +0800, Lazy Logic wrote:
> Quote from this website  http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/
> "All images linked below are for the version of Debian Installer being
> developed for the next Debian release and will install Debian testing ("*
> wheezy*") by default."
> 
> Link provided by above website
> http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/amd64/iso-cd/
> "These images will install the testing version of Debian, currently *Squeeze
> *."
> The above 2 site/link contradicts?

Thanks for your notice.

Forwarded to debian-cd list, whose members manage cdimage.d.o 

-- 
Simon Paillard


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110219121751.ga20...@glenfiddich.ikibiki.org

Bug#610872: Forbidden while accessing the documents

[Giovanni Mascellani]

Hi.

Apparently the document at [1] cannot be accessed because of wrong
permissions on server ("forbidden" error message).

 [1] http://people.debian.org/~corsac/anssi/

Thanks, Giovanni.
-- 
Giovanni Mascellani 
Pisa, Italy

Web: http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani
Jabber: g.mascell...@jabber.org / giova...@elabor.homelinux.org



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: To report a problem with the web site

[Steve McIntyre]

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 01:17:51PM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 02:44:18PM +0800, Lazy Logic wrote:
>> Quote from this website  http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/
>> "All images linked below are for the version of Debian Installer being
>> developed for the next Debian release and will install Debian testing ("*
>> wheezy*") by default."
>> 
>> Link provided by above website
>> http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/amd64/iso-cd/
>> "These images will install the testing version of Debian, currently *Squeeze
>> *."
>> The above 2 site/link contradicts?
>
>Thanks for your notice.
>
>Forwarded to debian-cd list, whose members manage cdimage.d.o 

Fixed. Thanks for the report!

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
There's no sensation to compare with this
Suspended animation, A state of bliss


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110219151203.gk4...@einval.com

Renda extra

[servcomercial]

Grande oportunidade de ganhar aquela grana extra somente para divulgar a empresa
frpromotora.
informacoes acesse
www.frpromotora.com.br/44571458

Bug#610872: Forbidden while accessing the documents

[Yves-Alexis Perez]

On sam., 2011-02-19 at 16:11 +0100, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Apparently the document at [1] cannot be accessed because of wrong
> permissions on server ("forbidden" error message).
> 
>  [1] http://people.debian.org/~corsac/anssi/
> 
> Thanks, Giovanni.

Thanks, should be fixed by now.

Regards,
-- 
Yves-Alexis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Another database error?

[iwantU2brich iwantU2brich]

Thanks!

2011/2/19 Simon Paillard 

> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 04:16:22PM +0100, iwantU2brich iwantU2brich wrote:
> > I was searching for :
> >
> > linux-image-2.6.37-trunk,
> >
> > "Error No such package."
> > on this site<
> http://packages.debian.org/experimental/linux-image-2.6.37-trunk-686>
> >
> > Is there an error or there is no such package?
>
> There is no such package.
>
> > Month ago or less I was searching and installing this kernel and there it
> > was in your repository, please answer me if you can.
>
> Then search "2.6.37" and you will find it's available in sid:
>
> http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=all&arch=i386&searchon=names&keywords=2.6.37
>
> --
> Simon Paillard
>

Bug#614111: packages.d.o: theme regression: table of binpkgs by architecture (colours, layout)

[Thorsten Glaser]

Package: www.debian.org
Severity: normal

I noticed a regression (actually two) in the list of binary pak-
kages per architecture, for example on this page:
‣ http://packages.debian.org/sid/kdelibs5-dev

It looks like this in Lynx (good):

 Debian -- Details of 
package kdelibs5-dev in sid (p16 of 17)
   CAPTION: Download for all available architectures

 Architecture  VersionPackage Size Installed Size   
  Files
  [193]amd64 4:4.4.5-31,791.6 kB   8676 kB
[[194]list of files]
  [195]armel 4:4.4.5-31,825.7 kB   13596 kB   
[[196]list of files]
[197]hurd-i386   4:4.4.5-31,774.8 kB   13588 kB   
[[198]list of files]
   [199]i386 4:4.4.5-31,830.4 kB   13612 kB   
[[200]list of files]
   [201]ia64 4:4.4.5-31,842.4 kB   34032 kB   
[[202]list of files]
  [203]kfreebsd-amd644:4.4.5-3+b1 1,835.8 kB   10750 kB   
[[204]list of files]
  [205]kfreebsd-i386 4:4.4.5-3+b1 1,829.7 kB   10670 kB   
[[206]list of files]
  [207]m68k (unofficial port)4:4.2.2-21,555.8 kB   12020 kB   
[[208]list of files]
   [209]mips 4:4.4.5-31,839.5 kB   13776 kB   
[[210]list of files]
  [211]mipsel4:4.4.5-31,832.4 kB   13776 kB   
[[212]list of files]
 [213]powerpc4:4.4.5-31,837.4 kB   13664 kB   
[[214]list of files]
   [215]powerpcspe (unofficial port) 4:4.4.5-11,832.0 kB   13640 kB   
[[216]list of files]
   [217]s390 4:4.4.5-31,795.4 kB   13664 kB   
[[218]list of files]
  [219]sh4 (unofficial port) 4:4.4.5-31,843.4 kB   13636 kB   
[[220]list of files]
  [221]sparc 4:4.4.5-31,835.1 kB   13644 kB   
[[222]list of files]
[223]sparc64 (unofficial port)   4:4.4.5-31,840.4 kB   13724 kB   
[[224]list of files]
 
___

   This page is also available in the following languages (How to set [225]the 
default document language):
   [226]Български  (Bəlgarski)  [227]Deutsch  [228]suomi  [229]français  
[230]magyar  [231]日本語 (Nihongo)
   [232]Nederlands [233]Русский (Russkij) [234]slovensky [235]svenska 
[236]українська (ukrajins'ka) [237]中文
   (Zhongwen,简) [238]中文 (Zhongwen,繁)
 
___

As for colours (in Lynx): architecture names are green,
"(unofficial port)" is red, "4:4.4.5-1" and "4:4.2.2-2"
are white (old/outdated versions, no distinction between
older Debian release and older upstream version but that
never was, in Lynx) and "4:4.4.5-3" and "4:4.4.5-3+b1"
are blue (version OK, including binNMU – no regression).

But in Opera (9.27 qt3-static i386-linux on MirBSD) there
are line breaks in "(unofficial\nport)" and "list of\nfiles"
which makes the entire subtable double-spaced. Furthermore,
all version fields are no longer colourised (in fact, the
entire table is black (links blue/underlined) on white).
This *is* a regression.

Judging from the fact that it looks the same as before the
Theme change in Lynx (good) I’d guess that, for the colours,
some CSS is missing, and for the line breaks, the subtable
width is limited (its width in Opera is about 70% of the
screen width of 1024px, and it shrinks with the browser
window, so this is probably a CSS problem as well).


-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
Architecture: m68k

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5+m68k.5-atari
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/mksh-static



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20110219201004.7376.85103.report...@ara2.mirbsd.org

DVD ISOs unavailable

[Виктор М]

Dear Sirs!
I wished to download the full set of installation DVD images of the 
previous stable release of Debian (Debian Lenny 5.0.8). I wanted to 
download this release in three versions: i386, amd64 and source. I was 
searching links from the page 
http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/debian-installer/index.en.html 
[http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/debian-installer/index.en.html.However] 
. However only i386 version is available from the server. When I click 
full DVD sets links to other versions I see only files with hash-sums on 
the pages appeared.


Are lenny 5.0.8 DVD ISOs available on your site? I need exactly this 
version (I know the newer version 6.0.0 squeeze is released). Where can 
I find them? If they aren't available, could you kindly download them on 
your server?


Respectively yours,
Victor.

DVD ISOs unavailable

[Виктор М]

Dear Sirs!
I wished to download the full set of installation DVD images of the 
previous stable release of Debian (Debian Lenny 5.0.8). I wanted to 
download this release in three versions: i386, amd64 and source. I was 
searching links from the page 
http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/debian-installer/index.en.html 
[http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/debian-installer/index.en.html.However] 
. However only i386 version is available from the server. When I click 
full DVD sets links to other versions I see only files with hash-sums on 
the pages appeared.


Are lenny 5.0.8 DVD ISOs available on your site? I need exactly this 
version (I know the newer version 6.0.0 squeeze is released). Where can 
I find them? If they aren't available, could you kindly download them on 
your server?


Respectively yours,
Victor.

Re: Bug#567781: update on the utf-8 conversion

[Andrei Popescu]

On Mi, 16 feb 11, 01:22:01, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
> 
> (I've manually deleted romanian which is a false positive)

Hi hi, I deleted the commented out entries now, I don't expect us to go 
back to ISO-whatever ;)

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: gcc-4.2-multilib on mipsel

[Andrei Popescu]

On Jo, 17 feb 11, 14:05:58, Ao Qi wrote:
> Hi, I need gcc-4.2-multilib on mipsel, however I connot find the package. It
> seems that debian does not give a download link.  Could you give me the
> package? Thanks.

Hmm, according to http://packages.debian.org/lenny/gcc-4.2-multilib the 
package is not available for mipsel. You might want to ask on 
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mips/ thought, since this list is for 
website development.

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature