Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2014-05-26 17:46, forum::für::umläute wrote: with that i meant a repository hosted on debian infrastructure. most packaging repositories are hosted on alioth [1]. many alioth packaging teams such as pkg-multimedia (and to a lesser extent collab-maint) mandate the workflow as outlined in [2]. (collab-maint probably does not mandate that workflow, but i haven't yet seen a repository in collab-maint that does not use it; i haven't looked too deeply though). And on 2014-05-26 23:36, Martin Steghöfer replied: I'm sorry, I think you forgot to include the URL for reference [2]. as a matter of fact, i forgot both references. [1] http://alioth.debian.org [2] hmm, actually i can't remember which reference i wanted to give, probably just re-iterating https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DevelopPackaging#Packaging_guidelines though it doesn't add any new info. gvbmadsr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJThEdFAAoJELZQGcR/ejb4w+wQAIUI40E2qg6uw0CZDZdA9dmi 2a5GmXT25FTBUGFs1lyhxaY8xQeQCOxjFX6JbNwTwnn6okdiqXUmuKW2aQH+CQ2s ue2znG2MLJtKyODYr0LNh9LffwzbSnPq1CCJBffwDf1YwlepGWHTwPwAnmAl5TDV Qs7zTtwTbgfqmWommdTYUF9IdHUDH5elknehDRDFzChgywHXvWiSeBnROU3L9H/j rS38k9oJz3Wc5kiH58FdXq0QW2DljvlodsY3ejmrmVCPT9VHBUKu3n4XxHSnYzfo lCBZfOeT4tmP49Z8gCtXstgdxVn4iZnOgprxUlATlliE9oWbpG03rlkwt6+AVgqR RML12wr/Ia/IwVPm240Eg8XoHAEP5ScAaUNmmdaWewMCcYefoAWJrexV+HLtCBpj McXke27atDTQH0YmrUZdyg6lI99LE//Smi563tjSvDZvM5s1VQfXsgWohZcWcwLM LBjIzz6osYy/NyYOSwcx+4H9SbmbYCVZ+4eNT9a4hgYgN82FVW5wf9CeqRytSuLu As1EnHerybXLWVnIdYxoexOP1jRR5iRxNSxXyJO1Kj201+mJsgfI3kU4kRPshGZW bHJ69+K1zshD0JB7fxm+yZZzhag7nTmrBDuYBqshhuYE3tbI0ntXyAbTo+si+OLe tmdHTgMTKJqfZyFVfSUd =9Ax/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
On 2014-05-21 23:26, Martin Steghöfer wrote: I tried it once, following the instructions on https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit, but decided against using it. It didn't simplify my work, but instead cluttered up my repository with the upstream source files. I don't get the point of having upstream files in the repository, if you're not allowed to touch them directly (only via patches). i guess the point is, that you only need a single checkout to get everything needed to build the package. What would be a more 'debian' repo? Just using the workflow mentioned on https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit? Or another repo host? with that i meant a repository hosted on debian infrastructure. most packaging repositories are hosted on alioth [1]. many alioth packaging teams such as pkg-multimedia (and to a lesser extent collab-maint) mandate the workflow as outlined in [2]. (collab-maint probably does not mandate that workflow, but i haven't yet seen a repository in collab-maint that does not use it; i haven't looked too deeply though). anyhow, i see that you changed the workflow :-) debian/control: - Vcs-Stanzas: seem to be missing (most likely because you would like to move the packaging to a more debian repo?) I simply didn't use a repo yet, when I created the debian/control file. the files in debian/control are alive insofar as they should be adapted to the current state of affairs, rather than represent the state of affairs when they were created. - Description: all those acronyms don't mean anything to me; also support for foo and bar specifics sounds weird to me. should that read supports formats foo and bar? This was mainly taken from upstream. Tried to improve the readability: https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/bdf960a4 thanks. you might also want to make *full* sentences. rather than Features foo. Supports bar. you should say It features foo. karlyriceditor supports bar. debian/rules: is quite nice by now :-) fgmasdr IOhannes ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Martin Steghöfer mar...@steghoefer.eu wrote: I tried it once, following the instructions on https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit, but decided against using it. It didn't simplify my work, but instead cluttered up my repository with the upstream source files. I don't get the point of having upstream files in the repository, if you're not allowed to touch them directly (only via patches). But you can generate the patch using git: % git checkout -b my-branch % vim src/file1.c % git commit -a -m Very important patch % git checkout master % git format-patch my-branch % mv -* debian/patches/my-patch.patch % echo my-patch.patch debian/patches/series The patch-queue tool in git-buildpackage can be useful too (gbp-pq). -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
El 26/05/14 21:12, Felipe Sateler ha escrit: On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Martin Steghöfer mar...@steghoefer.eu wrote: I tried it once, following the instructions on https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit, but decided against using it. It didn't simplify my work, but instead cluttered up my repository with the upstream source files. I don't get the point of having upstream files in the repository, if you're not allowed to touch them directly (only via patches). But you can generate the patch using git: % git checkout -b my-branch % vim src/file1.c % git commit -a -m Very important patch % git checkout master % git format-patch my-branch % mv -* debian/patches/my-patch.patch % echo my-patch.patch debian/patches/series The patch-queue tool in git-buildpackage can be useful too (gbp-pq). True that, before my post I hadn't seen gbp-pq yet (the Debian wiki page [1] about git packaging is a bit tenuous). In fact, after I wrote that, I gave gpb-pq a try (see latest commits on git [2] [3]) and kinda liked it, so I adopted it. I don't like the patch output format of gbp-pq though [3]. It forces me to use the From + Subject + unstructured text style instead of Author + Description, it uglifies the From value with encoding information (isn't the whole file UTF-8 by default?) and it's very verbose (Do I really want statistics about the number of modifications within my patch file?). I guess it's more standard (UNIX mailbox format), but it surely makes things less readable. Maybe there are some tuning possibilities that I haven't found yet, it probably uses git-format-patch internally, which is somewhat customizable. But for the patches the workflow is nice - it can't be much worse than manual quilt management anyway. At least some reward for dragging the upstream source around and having git-buildpackage complain about dirty working directories all the time! Cheers, Martin [1] https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit [2] https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/d48ccd50 [3] https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/f02325de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
El 26/05/14 17:46, forum::für::umläute ha escrit: many alioth packaging teams such as pkg-multimedia (and to a lesser extent collab-maint) mandate the workflow as outlined in [2]. I'm sorry, I think you forgot to include the URL for reference 2. Are you referring to this? http://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.html I am going to have a closer look at it. thanks. you might also want to make *full* sentences. Done. https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/500c4ad6 Thanks for the comments! Martin ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
Hi IOhannes!
Thanks a lot for the review! It really helps a lot!
El 20/05/14 12:36, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) ha escrit:
your Vcs: cool that you are using git.
but your workflow seems to be somewhat non-standard (only tracking
debian/ in git). we usually track the entire package in git, which
includes pristine-tarballs from upstream [1].
this eases integration with gbp a lot.
I tried it once, following the instructions on
https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit, but decided against using it.
It didn't simplify my work, but instead cluttered up my repository with
the upstream source files. I don't get the point of having upstream
files in the repository, if you're not allowed to touch them directly
(only via patches).
Anyway, I can adopt the more standardized workflow, if it helps the
collaboration with others. Will look into it.
debian/control:
- Vcs-Stanzas:
seem to be missing (most likely because you would like to move the
packaging to a more debian repo?)
I simply didn't use a repo yet, when I created the debian/control file.
Done:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/abfbc647
What would be a more 'debian' repo? Just using the workflow mentioned
on https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit? Or another repo host?
- Description:
all those acronyms don't mean anything to me; also support for foo
and bar specifics sounds weird to me. should that read supports
formats foo and bar?
This was mainly taken from upstream. Tried to improve the readability:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/bdf960a4
- Depends:
are all those manual dependencies really needed? why can't they be
calculated from by ${shlibs:Depends}
You are right, they can! I underestimated the power of
${shlibs:Depends}. Removed the explicit dependencies:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/bf7d1168
debian/changelog:
usually debian/changelog for an initial upload will only contain a
single line: * Initial release (Closes: #692968)
the purpose of this changelog is to report the changes in the packaging
with regard to the last upload. since there is none, you merge all those
changes into initial packaging.
also, changelog entries should only document versions uploaded to debian.
since 1.3-1 never made it, there is no use documenting it.
I understand, makes sense. Reduced the changelog:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/a21356c5
debian/rules:
there's some cruft involved here, to include upstream's changelog.
check out dh_installchangelogs.
I had tried that before, but failed. The problem was that the filename
of the upstream changelog was still in the docs file. Removed it:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/aa0df552
debian/copyright:
- Source:
the debian/copyright is supposed to not change between upstream-releases
if there are no changes in the copyrights.
this means that you should provide a version-independent link to the
sources, e.g.: http://sourceforge.net/projects/karlyriceditor/files
Done:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/c13d1959
- License:
according to `licensecheck` all files (with the exception of
./build-*.sh and ./nsis/create_installer.sh which do not have a license
boilerplate) are really GPL-3+
you claim that all files are copyright 2003-2005 James Klicman
ja...@klicman.org, of whom i cannot find any references in any file
(but debian/copyright). this may indicate that you did some extra research.
however, all files (excluding those mentioned above) have an explicit
copyright notice 2009-2013 George Yunaev. some have an additional
copyright 2009-2010 Daniel Roggen.
Really awkward mistake. That information is from another project and got
mixed up. Corrected it (same commit):
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/c13d1959
i find it easier to read if all the license-texts are collected at the
end of debian/copyright.
something like
snip
Files: *
Copyright: 2000-2001, John Doe
License: foo
Files: debian/*
Copyright: 2042, Mimi Minus
License: foo
License: foo
this is a foo license...
/snip
True that. Didn't know this was allowed. Done (same commit):
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/c13d1959
finally:
the package FTBFS in a pristine sid environment (using
pbuilder/git-buildpackage).
most likely the package is needs some work for libav10.
Exactly, it was libav10. The last time I worked on the package, it was
still working. But now, after an apt-get dist-upgrade it broke. Some
deprecated functions in Libav that got removed. Patched it:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/7bf48cda
I also patched other deprecated functions to avoid breakage at the next
Libav update:
https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/b84ce255
Thanks again for your review! It really pushed the
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
Hi Andreas! El 20/05/14 14:26, Andreas Cadhalpun ha escrit: Hi Martin, On 20.05.2014 12:36, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote: most likely the package is needs some work for libav10. This is indeed due to Libav 10. If you don't want to port karlyriceditor to Libav, you can just wait a bit until FFmpeg is back in Debian (currently sitting in NEW [1]) and then switch the build-dependencies to the '-ffmpeg' variants, as the attached patch does. I tested it and karlyriceditor builds fine with FFmpeg. Thanks for the information! I had already put some effort in porting karlyriceditor to Libav (compilation problems, crashes,...), finally it worked fine with the previous version of Libav, but broke with the update of Libav. I didn't know that FFmpeg was going to come back to Debian, I understood from the announcements that it was too difficult to have both Libav and FFmpeg in Debian. For now I just patched my package up a little more for the current compilation problems with Libav10. Whenever FFmpeg is back, we can drop those patches and use FFmpeg. Cheers, Martin ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
Hi Martin, On 21.05.2014 23:27, Martin Steghöfer wrote: Thanks for the information! You're welcome. :) I had already put some effort in porting karlyriceditor to Libav (compilation problems, crashes,...), finally it worked fine with the previous version of Libav, but broke with the update of Libav. I didn't know that FFmpeg was going to come back to Debian, I understood from the announcements that it was too difficult to have both Libav and FFmpeg in Debian. It may seem like that, since they both provide libraries with identical names. But in the end, its as easy as adding '-ffmpeg' to the FFmpeg library names, while not changing the pkg-config file names. That way projects can use pkg-config to determine the correct library names. As karlyriceditor uses pkg-config to determine the FFmpeg linker flags, it works just out of the box. For now I just patched my package up a little more for the current compilation problems with Libav10. Whenever FFmpeg is back, we can drop those patches and use FFmpeg. FFmpeg will be back as soon as the ftp-masters find the time to accept it into the archive. Best regards, Andreas ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
On 05/19/2014 07:19 PM, Martin Steghöfer wrote:
Just to bring this to your attention once more before moving on to other
places in order to find a reviewer or sponsor. It would be very nice, if
someone could have a look!
here at least a review:
your Vcs: cool that you are using git.
but your workflow seems to be somewhat non-standard (only tracking
debian/ in git). we usually track the entire package in git, which
includes pristine-tarballs from upstream [1].
this eases integration with gbp a lot.
debian/control:
- Vcs-Stanzas:
seem to be missing (most likely because you would like to move the
packaging to a more debian repo?)
- Description:
all those acronyms don't mean anything to me; also support for foo
and bar specifics sounds weird to me. should that read supports
formats foo and bar?
- Depends:
are all those manual dependencies really needed? why can't they be
calculated from by ${shlibs:Depends}
debian/changelog:
usually debian/changelog for an initial upload will only contain a
single line: * Initial release (Closes: #692968)
the purpose of this changelog is to report the changes in the packaging
with regard to the last upload. since there is none, you merge all those
changes into initial packaging.
also, changelog entries should only document versions uploaded to debian.
since 1.3-1 never made it, there is no use documenting it.
debian/rules:
there's some cruft involved here, to include upstream's changelog.
check out dh_installchangelogs.
debian/copyright:
- Source:
the debian/copyright is supposed to not change between upstream-releases
if there are no changes in the copyrights.
this means that you should provide a version-independent link to the
sources, e.g.: http://sourceforge.net/projects/karlyriceditor/files
- License:
according to `licensecheck` all files (with the exception of
./build-*.sh and ./nsis/create_installer.sh which do not have a license
boilerplate) are really GPL-3+
you claim that all files are copyright 2003-2005 James Klicman
ja...@klicman.org, of whom i cannot find any references in any file
(but debian/copyright). this may indicate that you did some extra research.
however, all files (excluding those mentioned above) have an explicit
copyright notice 2009-2013 George Yunaev. some have an additional
copyright 2009-2010 Daniel Roggen.
i find it easier to read if all the license-texts are collected at the
end of debian/copyright.
something like
snip
Files: *
Copyright: 2000-2001, John Doe
License: foo
Files: debian/*
Copyright: 2042, Mimi Minus
License: foo
License: foo
this is a foo license...
/snip
finally:
the package FTBFS in a pristine sid environment (using
pbuilder/git-buildpackage).
most likely the package is needs some work for libav10.
snip
ffmpegvideodecoder.cpp: In member function 'bool
FFMpegVideoDecoder::openFile(const QString, unsigned int)':
ffmpegvideodecoder.cpp:116:57: error: 'AVStream' has no member named
'r_frame_rate'
d-m_fps_den = d-pFormatCtx-streams[d-videoStream]-r_frame_rate.den;
^
ffmpegvideodecoder.cpp:117:57: error: 'AVStream' has no member named
'r_frame_rate'
d-m_fps_num = d-pFormatCtx-streams[d-videoStream]-r_frame_rate.num;
^
ffmpegvideodecoder.cpp:142:14: warning: 'AVFrame* avcodec_alloc_frame()'
is deprecated (declared at /usr/include/libavcodec/avcodec.h:3114)
[-Wdeprecated-declarations]
d-pFrame = avcodec_alloc_frame();
[...] ^
Makefile:709: recipe for target 'ffmpegvideodecoder.o' failed
make[2]: *** [ffmpegvideodecoder.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/tmp/buildd/karlyriceditor-1.11/src'
Makefile:117: recipe for target 'sub-src-check' failed
make[1]: *** [sub-src-check] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/tmp/buildd/karlyriceditor-1.11'
dh_auto_test: make -j1 check returned exit code 2
debian/rules:22: recipe for target 'build' failed
make: *** [build] Error 2
/snip
fmgadsr
IOhannes
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DevelopPackaging
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
Hi Martin, On 20.05.2014 12:36, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote: finally: the package FTBFS in a pristine sid environment (using pbuilder/git-buildpackage). most likely the package is needs some work for libav10. This is indeed due to Libav 10. If you don't want to port karlyriceditor to Libav, you can just wait a bit until FFmpeg is back in Debian (currently sitting in NEW [1]) and then switch the build-dependencies to the '-ffmpeg' variants, as the attached patch does. I tested it and karlyriceditor builds fine with FFmpeg. Best regards, Andreas 1: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/ffmpeg_7:2.2.1-1.html diff --git a/control b/control index 449a79c..74e1158 100644 --- a/control +++ b/control @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ Source: karlyriceditor Section: utils Priority: extra Maintainer: Martin Steghöfer mar...@steghoefer.eu -Build-Depends: debhelper (= 8), autotools-dev, dpkg-dev (= 1.16), qt4-qmake, libavformat-dev, libavresample-dev, pkg-config, libswscale-dev, libsdl1.2-dev, libqt4-dev-bin, libqt4-dev, docbook-to-man +Build-Depends: debhelper (= 8), autotools-dev, dpkg-dev (= 1.16), qt4-qmake, libavformat-ffmpeg-dev, libavresample-ffmpeg-dev, pkg-config, libswscale-ffmpeg-dev, libsdl1.2-dev, libqt4-dev-bin, libqt4-dev, docbook-to-man Standards-Version: 3.9.5 Homepage: http://sourceforge.net/projects/karlyriceditor/ ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
Just to bring this to your attention once more before moving on to other places in order to find a reviewer or sponsor. It would be very nice, if someone could have a look! Thanks! Martin El 10/05/14 17:03, Martin Steghöfer ha escrit: Hi all, I hope this is a good place for my cause. I am looking for someone to review and sponsor the package I have created for the karlyriceditor (Karaoke Lyrics Editor). The sponsoring article on mentors.debian.net suggests packaging teams as the primary way to find sponsors. And as the karlyriceditor is related to Multimedia, I thought that this might be the place to ask for help. Source package: * Package name: karlyriceditor Version : 1.3 Upstream Author : George Yunaev supp...@karlyriceditor.com * URL :http://www.ulduzsoft.com/linux/karaoke-lyrics-editor/ * License : GPL-3 Programming Lang: C++ Description : Karaoke lyrics editor with video rendering Extended description: A Qt-based GUI application to edit and test Karaoke lyrics in popular formats. Features full support for non-English languages, support for CDG, LRC and UltraStar specifics, built-in karaoke testing window and Karaoke video rendering. Builds 1 binary package: karlyriceditor The current version of the package can be inspected here: http://mentors.debian.net/package/karlyriceditor https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor ITP bug: #692968 Reviews, sponsorships and comments about finding a sponsor are very much appreciated. I'm quite unexperienced yet in packaging. Best regards, Martin Steghöfer ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Sponsorship/Review for package karlyriceditor
Hi all, I hope this is a good place for my cause. I am looking for someone to review and sponsor the package I have created for the karlyriceditor (Karaoke Lyrics Editor). The sponsoring article on mentors.debian.net suggests packaging teams as the primary way to find sponsors. And as the karlyriceditor is related to Multimedia, I thought that this might be the place to ask for help. Source package: * Package name: karlyriceditor Version : 1.3 Upstream Author : George Yunaev supp...@karlyriceditor.com * URL :http://www.ulduzsoft.com/linux/karaoke-lyrics-editor/ * License : GPL-3 Programming Lang: C++ Description : Karaoke lyrics editor with video rendering Extended description: A Qt-based GUI application to edit and test Karaoke lyrics in popular formats. Features full support for non-English languages, support for CDG, LRC and UltraStar specifics, built-in karaoke testing window and Karaoke video rendering. Builds 1 binary package: karlyriceditor The current version of the package can be inspected here: http://mentors.debian.net/package/karlyriceditor https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor ITP bug: #692968 Reviews, sponsorships and comments about finding a sponsor are very much appreciated. I'm quite unexperienced yet in packaging. Best regards, Martin Steghöfer ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
