Situation of long threads in -devel (was: Re: An apology to the mailing list and Charles Plessey)

[Christian Perrier]

I take this message from Manoj as an opportunity:

> Hi,
> 
> Inadvertently, a draft copy of an email written in anger, and
>  not meant to be actually sent, was sent to the mailing list,  instead
>  of a more reasoned response.
> 
> For that I apologize. You may see from the second response what
>  I meant to be public response, and the first email was meant to be a
>  release of my temper and angst; and certainly not fit fodder for a
>  public mailing list.


Ack. Thanks for this, Manoj.

I think that, in the very long threads that are currently
cluttering up -devel, we would benefit from most participants to cool
down and consider moving from the extreme positions I've seen when
overreading the threads.

Actually, these threads would indeed benefit a lot from a general
summary by the thread initiator. My current short view of them:

- situation of new source packages format: I haven't followed that
  one very much. It seems extinct as of now. Could lead to a summary
  (or I may have missed it).

- ddebs: the situation seems fairly balanced between people who
  feel the need for a separate namespace by extension and those who
  think this is not necessary. The general need for automatically
  built debug pacakages does not seem to be questioned strongly
  (but I may have missed something: I certainly haven't read all
  thread branches, particularly when people were called names..:-))

- Standards field: I feel like there is a quite wide opposition
  to the initial proposal to deprecate the field. The debate
  quickly slipped into a debate between people who give
  a big importance to that field and do careful checks on their
  package for conformance (en?)and people, particularly from teams
  with a high package load, who think this is not sustainable.
  I'm not sure we can make much more progress here. That ends up
  in useless thread branches where it is suggested that very
  valuable developers are doing a bad job which is certainly 
  counter-productive.





 




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

add me link exchang

[Rok Jhon]

hi

add me link ex.






thanks,


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Situation of long threads in -devel

[Russ Allbery]

Thank you for this message, Christian.  It was really appreciated here.

Christian Perrier  writes:

> I think that, in the very long threads that are currently cluttering up
> -devel, we would benefit from most participants to cool down and
> consider moving from the extreme positions I've seen when overreading
> the threads.

I'm personally trying to take a breather right now and erring on the side
of not responding.

Joss going from "what's the point in Standards-Version?" to filing a
Lintian bug asking for configuration capabilities to make it easier to
ignore the tag in the course of what felt like less than a day (this is
subjective -- I may well be *way* off) really hammered my mood more than
it probably should have.  As both a Policy delegate and a Lintian
maintainer, I felt like it was direct criticism both coming and going, in
a fast-escalating argument that I didn't really have the energy to expend
on.  I'm feeling way too much stress over it and it's feeling personal,
and that's not good, particularly since I'm sure it was not meant as
anything remotely personal.  It's too easy to personally identify with the
things one works on, for all of us I think.

One of the things that I find difficult to deal with about these long
threads is that they very quickly begin to take up a huge amount of time,
but there's a feeling that if one doesn't participate, one's voice or
position won't be heard.  Silence is taken to mean consent, or at least
apathy, and then people start acting.  I suspect that feeling is partly
not true, but not entirely.

This is one of the reasons, from my perspective, why we have a Policy
process that doesn't come to a conclusion in a 200-message thread over the
course of a couple of days.  (It, of course, errs on the side of being way
*too* slow, but that's mostly lack of manpower.)  I really wish people
would not express apparently final personal decisions after a brief flurry
of messages that many people have barely had time to wrap their mind
around, particularly in the middle of a heated conversation.

> - ddebs: the situation seems fairly balanced between people who
>   feel the need for a separate namespace by extension and those who
>   think this is not necessary. The general need for automatically
>   built debug pacakages does not seem to be questioned strongly
>   (but I may have missed something: I certainly haven't read all
>   thread branches, particularly when people were called names..:-))

I think there are a surprising number of parts of this discussion where
we've reached consensus.  The number of things we're hammering out seems
to be decreasing.  It would be great if someone would be willing to take
on writing up the consensus as they see it; I did one message, but things
have changed since then.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Non-unified patches and dpkg source format ‘3.0 (quilt)’.

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > - create directories that do not exist yet (patch will not do that for
> >   you AFAIK or at least that's the assumption that the current codebase
> >   made, it might have changed since this part of the code has been written)
> 
> According to the man page, and to tests I did, it does

So there's room for code removal, cool. Any hint since when this is the case?

> > - have a listing of all modified files in order to harmonize their
> >   timestamp afterwards (required to avoid unwanted rebuilding when
> >   patching auto-generated files and their source file)
> 
> Can't you get that using lsdiff from patchutils ?

Probably but then I indirectly add patchutils to build-essential
because dpkg-dev needs to depend on it. I have tried to avoid many
new dependencies when refactoring the code. Otherwise I could have
probably used many CPAN modules that deal with this and much more.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Situation of long threads in -devel

[Paul Wise]

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Christian Perrier  writes:
>
>> I think that, in the very long threads that are currently cluttering up
>> -devel, we would benefit from most participants to cool down and
>> consider moving from the extreme positions I've seen when overreading
>> the threads.
>
> I'm personally trying to take a breather right now and erring on the side
> of not responding.

As a general email and communications policy, not replying as much as
possible and stepping away from the keyboard when emotions flow has
worked reasonably well for me for a number of years. Some more tips
can be found in enrico's Debian Community Guidelines document:

http://people.debian.org/~enrico/dcg/

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Situation of long threads in -devel (was: Re: An apology to the mailing list and Charles Plessey)

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Actually, these threads would indeed benefit a lot from a general
> summary by the thread initiator. My current short view of them:
> 
> - situation of new source packages format: I haven't followed that
>   one very much. It seems extinct as of now. Could lead to a summary
>   (or I may have missed it).

The last summary is here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/07/msg00937.html

The whole sub-thread that recently sparkled discussions is about support
of context format patches and resulted in a wishlist/minor bug against
dpkg-dev. Some initial misunderstandings about the kind of format that
Charles was requesting us to support lead to heated discussions about
what's the best standard for patches nowadays.

The consensus also seems to be that adding support for zip archives is not
worth it.

Time to move on for this sub-thread, nothing interesting to discuss any
more. This thread doesn't change anything for the project of deploying
new source package formats and we're basically still waiting on ftpmasters
to act and deploy my branch.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Situation of long threads in -devel

[Josselin Mouette]

Le vendredi 14 août 2009 à 01:16 -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> Joss going from "what's the point in Standards-Version?" to filing a
> Lintian bug asking for configuration capabilities to make it easier to
> ignore the tag in the course of what felt like less than a day (this is
> subjective -- I may well be *way* off) really hammered my mood more than
> it probably should have.  As both a Policy delegate and a Lintian
> maintainer, I felt like it was direct criticism both coming and going, in
> a fast-escalating argument that I didn't really have the energy to expend
> on.

Maybe you shouldn’t take that personally? How about treating the lintian
bug for what it is? A feature request, nothing more, nothing less.

Given the strong opposition from people who are explaining that they
would do a better job at maintaining my packages (but without
volunteering for it, of course), I have abandoned the idea of
deprecating S-V, so I’m looking for other solutions. A small change in
lintian – that would benefit lots of other situations as well – doesn’t
look so bad, compared to having Manoj’s logorrhea land again on the
lists.

Cheers,
-- 
 .''`.  Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'   “I recommend you to learn English in hope that you in
  `- future understand things”  -- Jörg Schilling


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:42:55AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:

> > Yes, dpkg, apt-get, aptitude and synaptic all work perfectly fine.

> The debug command addresses my concerns here.

You know this command doesn't actually exist, right?  AFAIK it's only
referenced in an Ubuntu wiki spec, and this part of that spec doesn't appear
to have been implemented.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: MBF for removal of python-gnome2-desktop binary package

[Kartik Mistry]

Josselin Mouette wrote:
> due to some upcoming changes in the list of supported modules upstream,
> the python-gnome2-desktop binary package will be removed soon. Packages
> must depend on the individual modules instead. 
...
> Kartik Mistry 
>ldtp
> 
> Ara Pulido 
>ldtp (U)

Fixed as #541435

Thanks!

-- 
Cheers,
Kartik Mistry | 0xD1028C8D | IRC: kart_
Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Blogs: {ftbfs, kartikm}.wordpress.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Situation of long threads in -devel

[Russ Allbery]

Josselin Mouette  writes:
> Le vendredi 14 août 2009 à 01:16 -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :

>> Joss going from "what's the point in Standards-Version?" to filing a
>> Lintian bug asking for configuration capabilities to make it easier to
>> ignore the tag in the course of what felt like less than a day (this is
>> subjective -- I may well be *way* off) really hammered my mood more
>> than it probably should have.  As both a Policy delegate and a Lintian
>> maintainer, I felt like it was direct criticism both coming and going,
>> in a fast-escalating argument that I didn't really have the energy to
>> expend on.

> Maybe you shouldn’t take that personally? How about treating the lintian
> bug for what it is? A feature request, nothing more, nothing less.

Yes.  I should indeed not take that personally.  That's actually kind of
what I was trying to say, but you got a small bit of a core dump along
with it.  My apologies if it sounded like I was trying to make my
emotional reaction your problem.  The point of sharing that information
was more to partly explain why I was reacting too strongly instead, for
which I apologize.

The Lintian bug is an entirely reasonable feature request, even if I
personally would prefer you did maintain S-V in your packages.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Fri, Aug 14 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:42:55AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 13 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>
>> > Yes, dpkg, apt-get, aptitude and synaptic all work perfectly fine.
>
>> The debug command addresses my concerns here.
>
> You know this command doesn't actually exist, right?  AFAIK it's only
> referenced in an Ubuntu wiki spec, and this part of that spec doesn't appear
> to have been implemented.

As far as I can see none of this is actually present now. The
 archive scripts have not been modified, there is not debug/* archive
 section, there are no downloadable share, yada et al helper packages
 have not yet been modified.

So I would actually have been very surprised were
 aptitude/synaptic ahead of the curve and had current support.

This whole thread seems to be about getting policy to write up
 things, with most of the proposal currently not implemented in
 Debian.  Now, I think you meant to warn me that some of the currently
 proposed features do not have code in other distributions either, and
 that's fair warning.

manoj
-- 
There are two problems with a major hangover.  You feel like you are
going to die and you're afraid that you won't.
Manoj Srivastava    
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: default character encoding for everything in debian

[Osamu Aoki]

Hi,

(I want to see as much UTF-8 support.  These days, it is not bad.  Try
using "sed" with UTF-8.  It works!  Of course with some understandable 
gliches.)

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 08:55:27PM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 10 Aug 2009, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > Of course there's a penalty for certain operations.  But UTF-8 is about
> > as compact as an extended encoding is going to get.
> 
> Rubbish. You know why in Japan and other Asian countries UTF8 is not
> so common? Because many of their glyphs need 4 (four!) bytes, while
> for example jis-2022 (AFAIR) is much more compact.

Hmmm... not the best example here, ... technically if you are talking
size.  We got too many encodings for Japanese.  You see too many ESC
code for jis-2022.
 
> We are not living in an ASCII world anymore.

True.

Our choice of encoding is not much to do with size.  It is inertia and
backward compatibility.

FACTS:

Many Japanese e-mail uses jis-2022 for compatibility.  (E-mail was safe
only for 7 bit data in old days).  

As far as data size goes, compact popular ones are EUC(Unix) or S-JIS(MS
system). These are used in web pages etc. still.  These are as small as
UTF-16/UCS-2 used for many Unicode data internally.

But please note new MAC and XP/Vista/... use Unicode and I see many
files can be in UTF-8.  So things are changing.

Osamu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Steve Langasek]

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 12:55:38PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> > Yes, dpkg, apt-get, aptitude and synaptic all work perfectly fine.

> >> The debug command addresses my concerns here.

> > You know this command doesn't actually exist, right?  AFAIK it's only
> > referenced in an Ubuntu wiki spec, and this part of that spec doesn't appear
> > to have been implemented.

> As far as I can see none of this is actually present now. The
>  archive scripts have not been modified, there is not debug/* archive
>  section, there are no downloadable share, yada et al helper packages
>  have not yet been modified.

> So I would actually have been very surprised were
>  aptitude/synaptic ahead of the curve and had current support.

> This whole thread seems to be about getting policy to write up
>  things, with most of the proposal currently not implemented in
>  Debian.  Now, I think you meant to warn me that some of the currently
>  proposed features do not have code in other distributions either, and
>  that's fair warning.

Er, the point is that you've plucked this "apt-get debug" out of the
*Ubuntu* spec, ; that spec is
considered implemented, Ubuntu doesn't have such a debug command, and
Emilio's proposal at  makes
no mention of implementing this.  Yet your messages come across as though
you think it's a foregone conclusion that this command is going to be
implemented.

So given that specification of apt-get commandline options *definitely*
doesn't belong in Policy, and no one has agreed to implement 'apt-get
debug', I think you might want to make your concerns about the package
management tools explicit.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Is Emanuele Gentili MIA?

[Devid Antonio Filoni]

Hi,
Emanuele Gentili (emg...@ubuntu.com) is the Debian maintainer of
rapache package which is affected by an RC bug since a year. The RC
bug can be fixed in Debian (it is a package issue) but there are also
new rapache upstream releases that IMHO should be uploaded. Is he MIA?

Thanks,
Devid


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

seohubs has invited you to join Internet Marketing Strategy

[BlogCatalog]

seohubs  has invited you to
join the group: Internet Marketing Strategy.

BlogCatalog.com is the fastest-growing social
network for bloggers on the Internet. This is a
community where bloggers connect, share ideas, and
make things happen.

To join BlogCatalog, follow the link below:
http://www.blogcatalog.com/signup/

To view the group, follow the link below:
http://www.blogcatalog.com/group/internet-marketing-strategy

seohubs included the following message:
Join for latest seo news, google updates and much
more

Thanks,
BlogCatalog

Re: Is Emanuele Gentili MIA?

[Sandro Tosi]

Hello Devid,

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 22:48, Devid Antonio Filoni wrote:
> Hi,
> Emanuele Gentili (emg...@ubuntu.com) is the Debian maintainer of
> rapache package which is affected by an RC bug since a year. The RC
> bug can be fixed in Debian (it is a package issue) but there are also
> new rapache upstream releases that IMHO should be uploaded. Is he MIA?

Some questions, that might serve as a checklist for others dealing
with possibly MIA developers:

- did you try to contact the person? at least 2 or 3 times with (just
a indicative measure) a couple of weeks between each message?
- did you ping a bug on the BTS asking for its resolution?
- did you file a bug on the BTS for activities that signal lack of
maintainership (like new upstream release)?
- did you try to contact his sponsor (if it's a non-DD)?
- did you google for information about the person? In this case,
Emanuele has a blog that was last updated at the end of July 2009.
- did you read Developers Reference about what's the best procedures
about perspective MIA developers (included the email address to
contact)?

In this particular case, I see that Emanuele is neglecting some Debian
activities, but I see him active on Ubuntu: try to contact him (let it
be public, it's better, for example opening/replying to a bug on the
BTS) and see how it goes.

Regardsm
-- 
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Tollef Fog Heen]

]] Emilio Pozuelo Monfort 

| > Because you're trying to debug a binary on your system that's linked
| > against it.
| 
| Then you should work on making your package build with the new library, since 
it
| will be FTBFS anyway :)

No, it won't.  You're confusing changed ABI from changed API.

Say you have foo, linked against libbar1, this works fine. foo, linked
against libbar2 (where the ABI was bumped because some part of the ABI
changed), doesn't work.  Being able to debug both of those to see where
their behaviour differs has value.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Fri, Aug 14 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:


> Er, the point is that you've plucked this "apt-get debug" out of the
> *Ubuntu* spec, ; that spec
> is considered implemented, Ubuntu doesn't have such a debug command,
> and Emilio's proposal at
>  makes no mention of
> implementing this.  Yet your messages come across as though you think
> it's a foregone conclusion that this command is going to be
> implemented.

Well, I was nort looking at the Ubuntu spec at all, but I might
 have been mislead into a false sense of security:

From:  Philipp Kern 
Subject:  Re: Automatic Debug Packages
Message-ID:  

>>> This use case is IMHO implicitly addressed by making them
>>> downloadable and installable on the local system.

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort 
Message-ID: <4a84127e.1050...@gmail.com>

 And aptitude and dpkg will know how to install ddebs, somehow?
  and synaptic, etc?
>>> Yes, dpkg, apt-get, aptitude and synaptic all work perfectly fine.


Given that assurance that aptitude and synaptic will know how to
 install ddebs, I said that satisfies my concern. I don't actually care
 what the command keyword used is, it may well be
   aptitude Avara-Kadavara foo-debug for all I care.

Are you saying that the assurance had no merit?

> So given that specification of apt-get commandline options *definitely*
> doesn't belong in Policy, and no one has agreed to implement 'apt-get
> debug', I think you might want to make your concerns about the package
> management tools explicit.

Well, before this issue is nailed down and writ into policy, the
 use cases for on-line webdav/nfs/share based debugging (including
 issues of where things are cached, how long they are cached, whether
 the bandwidth requirements make it infeasible), as well as the download
 debug packages method details need to be hammered out.

I do think that we need to have some kind of broad architecture
 of the solution in place for the common use cases before we can
 actually craft policy, and so far, I am very fuzzy about the aolution
 architecture. 

manoj
-- 
In order to discover who you are, first learn who everybody else is;
you're what's left.
Manoj Srivastava    
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Peter Samuelson]

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]
> We haven't agreed on whether there should be one ddeb per source or
> per binary package, so I would leave this still opened.

Maybe I'm losing track of things here, but it seems to me that everyone
except you is saying one ddeb per binary.  And then you say "sure, we
could do that if we need to".  How many times has this happened so far
in the thread?  I haven't been keeping count.
-- 
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

[Russ Allbery]

Peter Samuelson  writes:
> [Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

>> We haven't agreed on whether there should be one ddeb per source or
>> per binary package, so I would leave this still opened.

> Maybe I'm losing track of things here, but it seems to me that everyone
> except you is saying one ddeb per binary.  And then you say "sure, we
> could do that if we need to".  How many times has this happened so far
> in the thread?  I haven't been keeping count.

Joerg was also advocating one ddeb per source package in the summary
message that he sent about the ftp-master approach, and Emilio has
mentioned a few times that ftp-master needs to buy in on that decision
(which I agree with).  I'm not sure if I'm missing some concern from the
ftp-master side.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

almodhena desea chatear

[almodhena]

---
almodhena  desea mantener el contacto contigo a través de algunos de
los mejores productos que Google ha lanzado recientemente.

Si ya utilizas Gmail o Google Talk, visita:
http://mail.google.com/mail/b-17b6dd4730-cfa92b467a-768fcdc2b4077351
Haz clic en este enlace para chatear con almodhena .

Si deseas obtener Gmail, la cuenta de correo gratuita de Google con
más de 2.800 megabytes de almacenamiento, y chatear con almodhena ,
visita:
http://mail.google.com/mail/a-17b6dd4730-cfa92b467a-768fcdc2b4077351

Gmail ofrece:
- Mensajería instantánea integrada en Gmail
- Protección eficaz contra el spam
- Función de búsqueda integrada para localizar mensajes y un útil
sistema para organizar los mensajes en "conversaciones"
- No se muestran pop-ups ni anuncios banner no orientados, sólo
anuncios de texto e información relevante respecto al contenido de tus
mensajes

Todo ello de forma gratuita. Espera. Todavía hay más. Al abrir una
cuenta de Gmail, también obtendrás acceso a Google Talk, el servicio
de mensajería instantánea de Google:

http://www.google.com/talk/intl/es/

Google Talk ofrece:
- Chat basado en web que podrás utilizar en cualquier sitio sin
necesidad de realizar una descarga
- Una lista de contactos sincronizada con tu cuenta de Gmail
- Llamadas de voz gratuitas de alta calidad de PC a PC al descargar el
cliente Google Talk

Gmail y Google Talk todavía se encuentran en versión beta. Trabajamos
con esmero para mejorar y añadir nuevas funciones a estos servicios,
por lo que es posible que solicitemos tus comentarios y sugerencias de
vez en cuando. Gracias por ayudarnos a mejorar nuestros productos.

Gracias por tu atención,
El equipo de Google

Para obtener más información acerca de Gmail y Google Talk, visita:
http://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/es/about.html
http://www.google.com/talk/intl/es/about.html

(Si las URL de este mensaje no funcionan al hacer clic en ellas,
cópialas y pégalas en la barra de direcciones del navegador).


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org