Re: agenda for Debian leadership team (a.k.a. Project Scud) meeting on 2005-04-24
On Sun, 24 Apr 2005, Branden Robinson / Debian Project Leader wrote: I realize that a closed meeting is not ideal; I welcome suggestions on how to balance the accountability of the DPL and the leadership team with the necessity of dealing with the occasional sensitive issue in a more discrete manner than a public IRC channel. Could abridged logs be made available with the content that is sensitive redacted?[1] (Ideally with a notation that content has been redacted.) That would help increase the transparency of the group and eliminate the need for you all to prepare public minutes,[2] as any other interested party could prepare their own. Don Armstrong 1: If needed, I volunteer to help facilitate this, but it may be best for the current members to handle it. 2: Not that they couldn't still be prepared by the attendees, of course. -- The trouble with you, Ibid he said, is that you think you're the biggest bloody authority on everything -- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p146 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 08:39:55AM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: On Monday 25 April 2005 08.03, Branden Robinson / Debian Project Leader wrote: * establishing a backup site for ``snapshot.debian.net`` I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official debian.*org* service in recognition of its value to the project. One concern I have, personally, is over precisely how much value snapshot.d.n provides to the *project*, as opposed to providing value to others outside the project. Since DDs have access to recently removed packages via the morgue on merkel (albeit not indexed nicely the way snapshot.d.n currently is), I really wonder if this service should be a priority for Debian to spend money on while our ports and other areas of core infrastructure are in a state of disarray (IMHO). I do find snapshot.d.n very helpful from time to time, and am certainly glad it's there; I don't even think it would be wrong for Debian to spend money on it; I just think there's just a question here of which hardware should get priority for funding. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian Project Leader report for 2005-04-24
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 01:03:35AM -0500, Branden Robinson / Debian Project Leader wrote: Here is the first of my reports as Debian Project Leader. You may read it in HTML format at: http://people.debian.org/~branden/dpl/reports/2005-04-24.html (First suggestion: set M-F-T appropriately. It was set to debian-devel-announce and [EMAIL PROTECTED] debian-project would be better, or debian-devel.) Sarge Release Challenges and Progress - [...] I offer a status report on the Sarge release because of its criticality, and because as DPL I want to do everything I can to keep our developers and users apprised of this central issue. If the release managers see that this report is correlated with a spike in reckless uploads to unstable, however, I will be forced to refrain from offering them. As I said in all three of the interviews I conducted recently (see `Interviews and Public Appearances`_, below), my top priority as DPL is to not get in the way of the Sarge release. Please do not put me in the awkward position of having to refrain from reporting on this issue to serve that goal. Just a bit of (hopefully constructive) feedback: I find the above to be quite unnecessarily condescending. We're not children and deserve to be treated as such. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: agenda for Debian leadership team (a.k.a. Project Scud) meeting on 2005-04-24
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I hope I'm not alone when I say that this confidentiality and seemingly crass Besserwisser tone concerns me. Because I am not experienced with the politics of Debian, this is all I will say. It is not ideal as Branden says. But I prefer closed groups who does some work to Anonymous Cowards who just complains. I'm all for openness but my experience shows me that closely knit groups with clear responsabilities does work better than fully open mailling lists. -- Peter Makholm |'Cause suicide is painless [EMAIL PROTECTED] | It brings on many changes http://hacking.dk |And I can take or leave it if I please |-- Suicide is painless -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: agenda for Debian leadership team (a.k.a. Project Scud) meeting on 2005-04-24
Le Lundi 25 Avril 2005 08:31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : I hope I'm not alone when I say that this confidentiality and seemingly crass Besserwisser tone concerns me. Because I am not experienced with the politics of Debian, this is all I will say. the point is, a DPL as a single person, may have confidential meetings with himself, and nobody bothers. But when it's a group of person ... whoa ... that's now a big deal ! So please, scud is not popular in all the community, but when you want to attack it, find real reasons. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpyrHrGGqQKH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: snapshot.debian.net
Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 08:39:55AM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: On Monday 25 April 2005 08.03, Branden Robinson / Debian Project Leader wrote: * establishing a backup site for ``snapshot.debian.net`` I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official debian.*org* service in recognition of its value to the project. One concern I have, personally, is over precisely how much value snapshot.d.n provides to the *project*, as opposed to providing value to others outside the project. Since DDs have access to recently removed packages via the morgue on merkel (albeit not indexed nicely the way snapshot.d.n currently is), I really wonder if this service should be a priority for Debian to spend money on while our ports and other areas of core infrastructure are in a state of disarray (IMHO). The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed. I would love to have it as an official service, and even a backup. I read that it currently takes one TB of disk space. Regards, Joey -- Have you ever noticed that General Public Licence contains the word Pub? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:15:57AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed. Does that include the binary packages? I'd guess that binary packages are of lesser use because of library and other environmental changes, and it is mainly/exclusively the source packages that are of assistance in this matter. Is that correct? --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:15:57AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 08:39:55AM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: On Monday 25 April 2005 08.03, Branden Robinson / Debian Project Leader wrote: * establishing a backup site for ``snapshot.debian.net`` I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official debian.*org* service in recognition of its value to the project. One concern I have, personally, is over precisely how much value snapshot.d.n provides to the *project*, as opposed to providing value to others outside the project. Since DDs have access to recently removed packages via the morgue on merkel (albeit not indexed nicely the way snapshot.d.n currently is), I really wonder if this service should be a priority for Debian to spend money on while our ports and other areas of core infrastructure are in a state of disarray (IMHO). The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed. Out of curiosity, do you have a sense of how long after a package is dropped from the archive that it ceases being useful to you for security research? I know that all of the stuff I've used snapshot for falls within the scope of what's kept in the morgue, which is quite a small subset of what snapshot keeps; snapshot just has much better (i.e., existing) indexing. I would love to have it as an official service, and even a backup. I read that it currently takes one TB of disk space. According to http://snapshot.debian.net/du/df.png, it's already exceeded 1.2TB. That sounds to me like it would be one of the larger direct hardware purchases ever made by the project, so I do think it's a good idea to ask how much of this history is truly needed by the project -- the open-ended 1.2TB and growing of snapshot.d.n, or something more modest, like the 60GB used by the morgue? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: snapshot.debian.net
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:15:57AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed. Does that include the binary packages? I'd guess that binary packages are of lesser use because of library and other environmental changes, and it is mainly/exclusively the source packages that are of assistance in this matter. Up to now I only needed source packages for security work. For investigating breakages and stuff, I would need binary packages, though. Even though I usually don't need them, I still consider the way to specify a date in the apt line quite useful when you want to downgrade your entire system back to before the breakage. Regards, Joey -- Have you ever noticed that General Public Licence contains the word Pub? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Project Leader report for 2005-04-24
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Hamish Moffatt wrote: and users apprised of this central issue. If the release managers see that this report is correlated with a spike in reckless uploads to [...] Just a bit of (hopefully constructive) feedback: I find the above to be quite unnecessarily condescending. We're not children and deserve to be treated as such. While we are not children, there are a lot of us who are rather expletive deleted individuals. DDs do reckless, irresponsible uploads all the time, why should anyone expect people not to do it after a sarge-might-freeze heads'up? If you never act like that, just ignore the whole thing. It is not meant for you. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050425 11:40]: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:15:57AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed. Does that include the binary packages? I'd guess that binary packages are of lesser use because of library and other environmental changes, and it is mainly/exclusively the source packages that are of assistance in this matter. I consider binary packages as extrem useful to check for dependency changes etc, or for fixing issues in some core packages where you need to take an older version for building a newer one. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 01:12:43PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: I consider binary packages as extrem useful to check for dependency changes etc, That can be done by having an archive of packages files alone. or for fixing issues in some core packages where you need to take an older version for building a newer one. Would one really do that after 6 months, the current on-and-about keeping time for .deb's on ftp-master merkel? I seriously doubt that -- for past stable releases and revisions, ok, but for unstable/testing? Those are by definition development branches, and older .deb's loose relevance after some time, nobody has them anymore, and whatever effect they had is no longer supported anyway in not a single way. For source packages that's different indeed, but a source only snapshot.d.o would at this moment be about 100GB, which is *much* better handleble, and is viable for some .d.o machine to provide as 'debian-snapshot' and that will probably get at least a few mirrors without any Debian expenses spend on it. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 01:21:04PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 01:12:43PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: I consider binary packages as extrem useful to check for dependency changes etc, That can be done by having an archive of packages files alone. or for fixing issues in some core packages where you need to take an older version for building a newer one. Would one really do that after 6 months, the current on-and-about keeping time for .deb's on ftp-master merkel? I seriously doubt that -- for past stable releases and revisions, ok, but for unstable/testing? Those are by definition development branches, and older .deb's loose relevance after some time, nobody has them anymore, and whatever effect they had is no longer supported anyway in not a single way. Here's a use-case I had for snapshot.d.n -- I needed debs which matched reasonably closely with the d-i rc2 release for use in an installfest. The nightly/weekly d-i builds didn't work for various reasons, and d-i failed to be happy with the debs currently in testing. So, back to s.d.n for the day the d-i rc2 came out, get the relevant debs, and -- lo and behold -- it all Just Worked. Without s.d.n I would have been very dead in the water, and there'd quite possibly be 40 less Debian machines in the world. Whilst snapshot.d.n might not be the most core of Debian services, I reckon it has it's uses -- if for no other reason than as a resource for collecting interesting historical statistics. - Matt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian Project Leader report for 2005-04-24
On Monday 25 April 2005 14:10, Hamish Moffatt wrote: I think the request is ok (and the release managers have requested the same before, quite reasonably). My complaint was Branden's threat: if his email triggers more uploads, he'll stop sending emails. er, no, if it triggers an upload storm, he'll stop reporting on release-issues in his emails, not stop sending mails all together. Quite a different thing no? -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgpgJhmRhXlTo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: snapshot.debian.net
Steve Langasek wrote:
I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official debian.*org*
service in recognition of its value to the project.
One concern I have, personally, is over precisely how much value
snapshot.d.n provides to the *project*, as opposed to providing value to
others outside the project. Since DDs have access to recently removed
packages via the morgue on merkel (albeit not indexed nicely the way
snapshot.d.n currently is), I really wonder if this service should be a
priority for Debian to spend money on while our ports and other areas of
core infrastructure are in a state of disarray (IMHO).
The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older
versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for
doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed.
Out of curiosity, do you have a sense of how long after a package is dropped
from the archive that it ceases being useful to you for security research?
At least as long as the package is in at least one of {oldstable,
stable, testing, unstable, experimental}. However, since there are
only rare cases of me dealing with removed packages, I can't rely on
experience.
According to http://snapshot.debian.net/du/df.png, it's already exceeded
1.2TB. That sounds to me like it would be one of the larger direct hardware
purchases ever made by the project, so I do think it's a good idea to ask
how much of this history is truly needed by the project -- the open-ended
1.2TB and growing of snapshot.d.n, or something more modest, like the 60GB
used by the morgue?
Having source packages available indefinitively would be good. When
it comes to space problems, maybe dropping binary packages when the
version is older than what is in (old)oldstable currently would be an
option.
Regards,
Joey
--
Have you ever noticed that General Public Licence contains the word Pub?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Project Leader report for 2005-04-24
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 02:36:35PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: On Monday 25 April 2005 14:10, Hamish Moffatt wrote: I think the request is ok (and the release managers have requested the same before, quite reasonably). My complaint was Branden's threat: if his email triggers more uploads, he'll stop sending emails. er, no, if it triggers an upload storm, he'll stop reporting on release-issues in his emails, not stop sending mails all together. Quite a different thing no? Not really. It's still I'll-take-something-away-if-you-don't-behave. As the release managers are doing a fine job of communicating themselves I didn't expect the DPL to report on the release anyway. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Project Leader report for 2005-04-24
On Monday 25 April 2005 15:40, Hamish Moffatt wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 02:36:35PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: On Monday 25 April 2005 14:10, Hamish Moffatt wrote: I think the request is ok (and the release managers have requested the same before, quite reasonably). My complaint was Branden's threat: if his email triggers more uploads, he'll stop sending emails. er, no, if it triggers an upload storm, he'll stop reporting on release-issues in his emails, not stop sending mails all together. Quite a different thing no? Not really. It's still I'll-take-something-away-if-you-don't-behave. I disagree, it's just a I'm gonna try this, if I find it is counterproductive, I won't do it again in the future which IMO is just common sense. As the release managers are doing a fine job of communicating themselves true :- ) -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgpcR89JVI3ZD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: snapshot.debian.net
ma, 2005-04-25 kello 11:37 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar kirjoitti: Does that include the binary packages? I'd guess that binary packages are of lesser use because of library and other environmental changes, and it is mainly/exclusively the source packages that are of assistance in this matter. Is that correct? I have used snapshot.d.n a couple of times to get old (from early sarge) binary packages to test bugs related to upgrade problems for a package. It is possible that a mere source package would do, but recompilation now is not guaranteed to create the same binary package as what the user user installed back then. Fewer moving parts means debugging is easier. This use alone is not, however, enough to warrant a disk system in the terabyte size, I think. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[no subject]
Para não receber mais e-mail da Top Avestruz envie para [EMAIL PROTECTED] assunto: Remover No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.2 - Release Date: 21/4/2005
Re: snapshot.debian.net
I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official debian.*org* service in recognition of its value to the project. Summarizing the discussion so far: (1) drain of funds / should Debian really purchase disk space of that size? (1.4TB, growing and growing...) (2) there is also the morgue (60G but only goes back a few months) (3) snapshot.d.n is useful for security - so far only source was used for this purpose (4) for various purposes, old binaries also seem useful; especially since the old binaries can not (easily) be regenerated from the sources. (5) the indexing is really nice (compared with what the morgue offers) Comments: - why not leave it where it is now, just add the DNS alias - How much *does* Debian spend on resources right now? Not much, afaict - most resources are sponsored by somebody (as is current snapshot.debian.net). - to limit the growth: keep x years of binaries, y years of source, and rely on past Debian releases for the really ancient stuff. Conclusion: so far, I get the feeling that snapshot is a service that would be missed if it were discontinued, so I think 'awarding' it a debian.org alias is justified. NOTE I haven't spoken Fumitoshi Ukai, who is maintaining snapshot.d.n afaict, so maybe he has totally different views. so long -- vbi -- Could this mail be a fake? (Answer: No! - http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/intro) pgpwA7pCGTa52.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 10:37:48PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official debian.*org* service in recognition of its value to the project. Summarizing the discussion so far: [...] an interesting data point would be how much the service is used. could access statistics be made available, please? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 03:14:41PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
I wonder if snapshot shouldn't be promoted to an official
debian.*org*
service in recognition of its value to the project.
One concern I have, personally, is over precisely how much value
snapshot.d.n provides to the *project*, as opposed to providing value to
others outside the project. Since DDs have access to recently removed
packages via the morgue on merkel (albeit not indexed nicely the way
snapshot.d.n currently is), I really wonder if this service should be a
priority for Debian to spend money on while our ports and other areas of
core infrastructure are in a state of disarray (IMHO).
The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older
versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for
doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed.
Out of curiosity, do you have a sense of how long after a package is dropped
from the archive that it ceases being useful to you for security research?
At least as long as the package is in at least one of {oldstable,
stable, testing, unstable, experimental}. However, since there are
only rare cases of me dealing with removed packages, I can't rely on
experience.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. When I said dropped from the archive, I
meant the particular version of the package, not the package as a whole.
According to http://snapshot.debian.net/du/df.png, it's already exceeded
1.2TB. That sounds to me like it would be one of the larger direct hardware
purchases ever made by the project, so I do think it's a good idea to ask
how much of this history is truly needed by the project -- the open-ended
1.2TB and growing of snapshot.d.n, or something more modest, like the 60GB
used by the morgue?
Having source packages available indefinitively would be good. When
it comes to space problems, maybe dropping binary packages when the
version is older than what is in (old)oldstable currently would be an
option.
At the current rate, that would suggest 3-4TB of usage total... that seems
excessive to me, but if you say all of this data is potentially useful to
you, then I accept that.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: snapshot.debian.net
* Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-04-25 13:12]: I consider binary packages as extrem useful to check for dependency changes etc, or for fixing issues in some core packages where you need to take an older version for building a newer one. Also, snapshot.d.net could be used for automated upgrade testing between different versions and all kind of combinations. This is a great project just waiting to be implemented by someone... -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
* martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-04-25 19:58]: Instead, if you really want to set up a European mirror, buy a couple of disks in Japan, ask them folks over there to make a copy, set it up with the same scripts here, rsync it once, and name it snapshot-eu.debian.net. Actually, that's what I suggested to Ukai-san too but he thought that rsyncing the archive across the net would be a better idea. He wrote a simple script for this which basically uses rsync and cp and goes through every day. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: agenda for Debian leadership team (a.k.a. Project Scud) meeting on 2005-04-24
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Michael Banck wrote: I hope I'm not alone when I say that you hiding behind such a laughable email address concerns me. If you want to be part of the Debian community (and posting to -project pretty much indicates that), you should get a real name and email address now. Don't kid yourself, he might not be a new kid on the block. For all we know, he might be Eray in disguise... His obfuscated identity is obviously being done on purpose. For which purpose, well, only he knows for sure. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
