RE: debian.org : We know what’s going on with your Google rankings

[David Rains]

Hi* debian.org *,

I noticed something interesting while going through your website, *debian.org
*
It's apparent that you have used Adwords marketing to promote your business
in the past, however your website does see some organic search traffic here
and there. Now, I believe I can help increase that portion of organic
traffic significantly, at *debian.org *

I believe you would like to come top on searches for keywords related
to: *debian.org
*   ... I found a number of SEO issues such as broken
links, page speed issue, HTML validation errors, images with no ALT text on
your website, that's stopping you from getting that traffic.

How about I fix those, and also promote you through engaging content on
relevant places on the web (read, social media).

I guarantee you will see a drastic change in your search ranking and
traffic once these issues are fixed. Also, this is one time, so no paying
adwords every month.

Is this something you are* interested in*?

*If yes, please allow me to send you a No Obligation Audit Report and
quote.*

Hoping to hear from you and take this partnership ahead.

I also prepared a free website Audit report for your website. If you are
Interested i can show you the report. I'd be happy to send you our package,
pricing and past work details, if you'd like to assess our work.

*Best Regards,*
*David Rains** |Sales Executive*


P.S : Don’t want to receive these emails in the future? Then reply to this
email with ‘Unsubscribe’ in the subject line.

P.S: This is our marketing strategy that we use the Gmail account. Please
reply us as quick as possible for more discussion about your website. Once
you reply us back, the next communication I will do is from my corporate
email ID.

P.s:Do you have a (Skype ID OR Phone No) We can have a quick discussion on
the marketing plan as per your website's requirement.
Kind Regards

Bug#927987: Don't tell users to use ext3

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: www.debian.org

https://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/amd64/apcs03.html.en says

a single / partition (plus swap) is probably the easiest, simplest way
to go. However, if your partition is larger than around 6GB, choose ext3
as your partition type.

OK, the installer proposed ext4, but as you wish, OK, we will choose ext3.

 Ext2 partitions need periodic file system integrity checking, and this
 can cause delays during booting when the partition is large.


That is nice to know but what about ext4?

In fact no need to mention any ext[234] in this whole document anymore.

Technology Leads - B2B Decision Makers

[jennifer . taylor]

Hi,



Would you like to own the data in excel file for unlimited usages with
quarterly updates?



We can provide you the contact information of:-

   - *CEOs*
   - *CXOs*
   - *COOs*
   - *CTOs list*
   - *Chief information security officers list*
   - *EVP/SVP/VP of IT executives list*
   - *IT directors list*
   - *IT Managers List*
   - *IT security executives list*
   - *IT Resellers/VARs list*
   - *MSPs/MSSPs list*
   - *Database Administrators list*
   - *Network Administrators list*
   - *Business Intelligence Administrators list*
   - *SME IT decision makers list*
   - *Fortune 1,000 companies IT decision makers list*
   - *SME Business owners list*
   - *AWS Customers/partners list*
   - *Microsoft Customers/partners list*
   - *IBM Customers/partners list*
   - *Oracle Customers/partners list*
   - *SAP Customers/partners list*
   - *CRM Customers list*
   - *ERP Customers list*
   - *VoIP Customers list*
   - *Backup and recovery customers list.*
   - *Business Intelligence, Networking software, IT security software,
   Database application users list.*

We provide data across the globe - North America, EMEA, Asia Pacific, and
LATAM.



Please review and let me know your current requirement, we will be more
than happy to share you counts and other details.



We await your response!



Thanks,

*Jennifer Taylor*

Database coordinator



To opt out please response Remove

Bug#911540: marked as done (wiki.debian.org: BootFloppy page bootfloppy.img link moved)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 25 Apr 2019 17:53:30 +0200
with message-id <23745.55290.481494.353...@informatik.uni-koeln.de>
and subject line closing
has caused the Debian Bug report #911540,
regarding wiki.debian.org: BootFloppy page bootfloppy.img link moved
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
911540: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911540
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: wiki.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: patch

Dear wiki.debian.org Maintainer,
in 2011 page:
https://wiki.debian.org/BootFloppy
heading:
Creating a standard boot floppy
subheading:
Linux
link:
You can download the boot image from
the URL:
http://ftp.belnet.be/packages/damnsmalllinux/current/bootusb-0.8-img
404s...
a 'correct', at least up in 2018, version of this link, or at least a for-all-
practical-purposes-similar img file, may be found at:
http://ftp.belnet.be/pub/damnsmalllinux.org/current/bootfloppy.img
please change that link, and please consider looking at other URLs in
https://wiki.debian.org that point to http://ftp.belnet.be/packages being now
moved to http://ftp.belnet.be/pub
Kind Regards,
-Bird Lopers



-- System Information:
Debian Release: 9.5
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.15.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_AU.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_AU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), 
LANGUAGE=en_AU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Since this wiki page was removed, there's no need to update the link.
-- 
regards Thomas--- End Message ---

Bug#685772: marked as done (www.debian.org: Please clarify official/unofficial status of resources under http://www.debian.org/support)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:33:14 +
with message-id <5cc1d33ae389_71e32b1610ef70d018...@godard.mail>
and subject line Bug #270772 in www.debian.org fixed
has caused the Debian Bug report #270772,
regarding www.debian.org: Please clarify official/unofficial status of 
resources under http://www.debian.org/support
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
270772: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=270772
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: serious
As I don't familiar with Debian mail lists hierarchy I previously ask for
right place at:

  debian-de...@lists.debian.org
  http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/175739

  debian-www@lists.debian.org
  http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.www/37994

But next pointed to this bug list:

  http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages

So...



I think that page:

  http://www.debian.org/support

MUST be reorganised in this way:

 * Make clarification on difference between official and non-official support
   resources.
 * Split page on two part: first list official resources, second -
   non-official.
 * Remove some non-official resources.
 * Add link to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianResources

If my arguments non-valuable or my vote value low I ask only for:

 * Make clarification on difference between official and non-official support
   resources.

I try to take arguments why doing so.



I think that page:

  http://www.debian.org/support

describe two things:

 1) how to get help on Debian topic
 2) channels of interaction between regular users and Debian project

While 1) goal is currently completed by this page 2) goal is partially broken
- this page doesn't take easy distinct what belong to Debian project.

Personally I think that all under *.debian.org are official. But this is my
assumption. Where I can find this kind of info?

I believe that most of people associate Debian with DFSG so I believe that
most of these people think that official Debian resources consistent with DFSG
(like avoiding discrimination, priorities on Debian users and free software,
and other parts from DFSG).



I don't know where stated official information about what are official Debian
resources for human interaction.

As I understand official resources are:

 * Debian documentation (txt, html, pdf)
 * Debian Wiki (wiki.debian.org)
 * Debian mailing lists (accessed from Google Groups (HTTP) or Gmane (NNTP))
 * Package Maintainers (@packages.debian.org, where I can find
   archive of these mails??)
 * Bug Tracking System (mail, HTTP)
 * IRC (irc.debian.org)

I think that http://www.debian.org/support is only one right place for such
king of info in current hierarchy of http://www.debian.org/...



Compare with this page:

  http://www.debian.org/

which have column:

Support
Debian International
Security Information
Bug reports
Mailing Lists
Mailing List Archives
Ports/Architectures

There are no links to non-official resources.



While some resources have term of use like:

  http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/disclaimer

but I don't find terms under another pages:

  http://wiki.debian.org/
  http://wiki.debian.org/DebianWiki/Contact
  http://www.debian.org/support#irc
  http://wiki.debian.org/IRC#Official_Debian_IRC_channels
  http://www.debian.org/Bugs/

I try to look these keywords without success:

  term licence statement agreement FAQ contract

I don't discuss about legality of communication, licence issues or disclaimers
on these resources (but it is essential!! for example if wiki permission too
restrictive I can't copy example of configs, etc).

My point in that if page http://www.debian.org/support achieve goal:

 * Make clarification on difference between official and non-official support
   resources.

we have sentences that describe what mean to be official resources.

This text must be harmonised with term of use of official resources.



When I say that goal

 1) how to get help on Debian topic

completed I miss one thing. http://www.debian.org/support point to 2 forums.
But:

  

Bug#270772: marked as done (http://www.debian.org/support - order of entries makes no sense to me)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:33:14 +
with message-id <5cc1d33ae389_71e32b1610ef70d018...@godard.mail>
and subject line Bug #270772 in www.debian.org fixed
has caused the Debian Bug report #270772,
regarding http://www.debian.org/support - order of entries makes no sense to me
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
270772: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=270772
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: minor

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

I think entries on the support web page should be roughly ordered by
importance (where it is 'obvious') - meaning: somebody looking for help
should start at the top and get the easy answers and get to the bottom
for the hard questions.  Also, /support and /doc should be viewed
together.

Going through, in the order I'd propose:
Documentation
good at the top
Known problems
is ok here. But I'd really expect the bts mentioned in this place
instead in its own section.

Known Problems

Limitations and severe problems of the current stable
distribution (if any) are described on the [release notes]
and in the [errata].

# the [release pages] link points to installation manual etc., which
# is probably not useful when I'm browsing /support because I'm
# having trouble with my installed Debian system. (And please, somebody
# change 'The new release' to 'This release' on /releases/stable/ - it's
# hardly 'new' now.)

Known problems with individual packages are recorded in the
[bug tracking system].  Each bug is given a number, and is kept
on file until it is marked as having been dealt with.

For information about known problems in a particular package,
insert the package name in the form below and hit 'Submit'.
[insert web form here]
More information about the bug tracking system, especially also
how to report a bug if it is not recorded in the system yet, can
be found in the [bug tracking system web pages].

# the existing section on the bts does, imho, tell too much about
# submitting bugs and not enough about querying bugs.
===
Mailing lists
looks fine.
Is there a list of mailing lists on alioth, and should it be
referenced here if it exists? Or, in absence of such a list, mention
"many package specific mailing lists are also hosted on [alioth]."
Web sites
This should contain much more links. See also
 (and
possibly replies). For reference:
http://wiki.debian.net/
http://forum.debian.net (if it gets users)
http://www.aboutdebian.com/
http://www.debianforum.de/forum/
http://design2i.com/debian/
About debianforum.de: perhaps instead of linking to a german page
here, have the english page only say "for links to Debian specific
web pages in other languages, please see the translations of this page
listed at the bottom".
Hmmm. Very Hmmm. When I'm at the bottom, I see that there's a
related links page. I'd link to that one in this section and drop
the Other Resources section entirely for starters. But really, the
'web sites' section of /support and the 'related links' page need to
be merged or disentangled. What I would propose: only point to the
related links page from /support, but reorganize the former so that
Debian specific links are a section of their own.
On-line Real Time Help Using IRC
fine to me, but why is it currently that far down on the page?
Usenet Newsgroups
I list this down here because there seem to be no established Debian
specific newsgroups.  Let's have Debian specific support first,
general support further down.
Reaching Package Maintainers
I'd drop this section entirely.  Reaching package maintainers by the
bts is documented in the Known Problems (new) section, and instead
of contacting package maintainers directly, people should rather use
the mailing lists - I think there's a mailing list to cover most of
the topics.
Linux User Groups
New section. "Local Linux User Groups can be found in many places;
most of these have regular meetings to discuss Linux problems,
and/or have their own mailing lists or web forums." With link to
, or
remove the "Linux User Groups" from related_links and move it here

Bug#147164: marked as done (www.debian.org: DDP: DDP policy is too out of date)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:08:35 +
with message-id <5cc1cd73152b5_71e32b1610ef70d018...@godard.mail>
and subject line Bug #147164 in www.debian.org fixed
has caused the Debian Bug report #147164,
regarding www.debian.org: DDP: DDP policy is too out of date
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
147164: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=147164
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: www.debian.org
Version: N/A; reported 2002-05-16
Severity: important

(didn't now where to send this to, we should have a virtual 'debian-ddp'
or 'documentation' package to send the DDP stuff to).

Ok. The current DDP policy is way out of date, this has as a consequence
that there are a number of discrepancies in the published documentation on
how to handle, for example, internationalization extensions.

Some issues that need to be tackled in policy which are currently not there:

- use of CVS in the DDP documentation (this is a must and many documentation
does not follow it)

- how must packages be prepared: one package per document? one for each
translated version?

- layout of documentation in ftp.debian.org/debian/doc (we are not currently 
publishing
there since it's done with 'byhand' targets in the packages), we need to
remove the byhand targets to properly "control" that section and tell
authors how to publish there

- formats (other than HTML) that the document must compile to in order for
it to be published.

- where to send bugs related to documentation (to the package? to the
www site?)

- procedure of inclusion of documents in the DDP CVS server (what to edit,
what to add and what to change) (not really policy but should be added)

I have a draft of proposal to remove the current policy and add a new one
which should close this bug. Will post more info when it's complete.

Regards

Javi

PS: Most of this information is under 'issues' and 'ideas' in the
www.debian.org/ddp pages but it's been a long time and the current policy
has not  changed for a long time.


-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux avalon 2.4.18 #1 SMP mié abr 3 12:47:49 CEST 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=es_ES@euro, LC_CTYPE=es_ES@euro


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,

Bug #147164 in www.debian.org reported by you has been fixed in the Git 
repository.
You can see the commit message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:

https://salsa.debian.org/webmaster-team/webwml/commit/a2cb11d8e66440363a2943e61fc593d3f6525dbe


remove DDP policy, Closes: #147164


(this message was generated automatically)
-- 
Greetings

https://bugs.debian.org/147164--- End Message ---

Bug#927805: marked as done (www.debian.org: number of developers in webwml/english/vote/2019/vote_001_quorum.txt looks incorrect)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 25 Apr 2019 12:08:15 +0200
with message-id <20190425100815.ga12...@pryan.ekaia.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#927805: www.debian.org: number of developers in 
webwml/english/vote/2019/vote_001_quorum.txt looks incorrect
has caused the Debian Bug report #927805,
regarding www.debian.org: number of developers in 
webwml/english/vote/2019/vote_001_quorum.txt looks incorrect
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
927805: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=927805
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainers,

File webwml/english/vote/2019/vote_001_quorum.txt, as of commit
c6a0c8..., states:

Current Developer Count = 901
Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 15.8350876221131

I guess that the "Current Developer Count" value should be 1,003
instead of 901, because 1,003 is the number of developers in
vote_001_quorum.log (as of commit 88d434...) and it is the
number than makes "Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 15.8350876221131"
true.

If my calculations are correct:

sqrt(901)/2  = 15.0083310198036
sqrt(1003)/2 = 15.8350876221131

Regards,

Rafa.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 06:18:51PM +0200, Rafa wrote:
> Package: www.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear Maintainers,
> 
> File webwml/english/vote/2019/vote_001_quorum.txt, as of commit
> c6a0c8..., states:
> 
> Current Developer Count = 901
> Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 15.8350876221131
> 
> I guess that the "Current Developer Count" value should be 1,003
> instead of 901, because 1,003 is the number of developers in
> vote_001_quorum.log (as of commit 88d434...) and it is the
> number than makes "Q ( sqrt(#devel) / 2 ) = 15.8350876221131"
> true.
> 
> If my calculations are correct:
> 
> sqrt(901)/2  = 15.0083310198036
> sqrt(1003)/2 = 15.8350876221131

Thanks Rafa, this was alrady fixed.

Ana--- End Message ---

Dolgozói juttatások

[Kapolcs Mátyás]

Üdvözlöm!
 
2019 januártól változik a nem bér jellegű juttatások rendje.
 
Egy kiváló lehetőséggel élehet, amennyiben a mi kártyánkat választja!
 
Ez a kártya:
 
Korlátlanul felhasználható:
 
készpénzfelvétel
élelmiszer vásárlás
egészségügyi ellátás
elektronikai termékek vásárlása
oktatás
szállás
 
Kártyánk az egyetlen olyan valóban szabadfelhasználású kártya, melyet minden 
POS terminál elfogad!
 
Amennyiben kártyánk felkeltette érdeklődését, mint dolgozói juttatás, kérem 
keressen fel a további tájékoztatás érdekében!
 
Örömmel állunk rendelkezésére mindenben!


Kapolcs Mátyás
Hungary Team Leader