On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:23 AM, V Stuart Foote wrote:
> Sophi, *
>
> Build on Linux but only when patching.
>
> Routinely bisect against my archive of daily pulls of Windows TBs.
>
> I don't run a bibisect git repo (though I probably should invest in setting
> up the Windows flavor since we seem s
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Michael Meeks
wrote:
> + 'make check' run by CI ? (Michael)
> + could we have this for Linux ?
> + run by dbgutil tinderbox - no all platforms (Norbert)
>+ need to run the numbers
>+ may be able to run the linux dbgutil m
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
> * Jenkins / CI update (Norbert)
> + [Norbert is traveling]
> + how are the stats for Jenkins generated? (Jan-Marek)
log on ci.libreoffice.org
sudo su - ci
./job_stats.pl 7
___
List Name: Li
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Joel Madero wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>>
>> Insufficient Data though can also be used for situations where a bug can
>> not be reproduced due to, well, insufficient data.. i.e. happened one
>> time crash and no stack trace, no exa
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 10/16/2015 11:40 PM, Robinson Tryon wrote:
>>
>> A big thanks to everyone who's been helping us out with bibisection of
>> regressions, and a hearty congratulations to Terrence Enger for being
>> the lucky one to perform the 1000th one
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Markus Mohrhard
wrote:
>> AI: + will have a look at the CppUnit to implement 'expected failure'
>> (Jan-Marek)
>> + Cpp logs are e.g. in
>> workdir/CppunitTest/sal_rtl_math.test.log
>
>
>
> That is already possible with cppunit. Instead of using C
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen
wrote:
> there is no excuse to not run 'make check' anymore at least before
> pushing -- if there ever was one.
you mean beside the fact that make check fails on Windows _and_ Mac ?
___
List Name: Libre
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Michael Meeks
wrote:
> + Windows 64 status (David O)
>+ all fine, poking some Base test with Stephan
>+ an OLE test, failing on some machines not others;
> environment dependent. Thorsten's machine doesn't crash.
That
>
> * Jenkins update (Norbert)
I missed the call.. but here are the stats for last week:
from:Thu May 21 16:11:49 2015
master linux rel jobs:155 ok:147 ko:7 fail ratio:4.51% break:2 broken
duration:1.83%
master linux dbg jobs:105 ok:97 ko:8 fail ratio:7.61% break:3 broken
duration:5.44%
master ma
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Pedro wrote:
> Norbert Thiebaud wrote
>> + The points where we think there _may_ be still some issue that need
>> actual user-gui testing (like VclPtr) can be tested just as well with
>> a Beta release.
>>
>> For these reasons twe
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Pedro wrote:
> Michael Meeks-5 wrote
>> + BugHunting Session 5.0: One week away!
>> + hoping for new people
>
> It would be more useful to do a BugHunting session with RC1 (because it
> installs to the default folder and uses the real profile) than with
>
> I have cloned again, this time directly onto the machine where I am
> trying to run, and things seem to be working.
ok so based on your test and Andrea's I'll build the other 8400
commit that need
building for that repo...
Norbert
___
List Name:
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 5:52 PM, wrote:
> Quoting "Norbert Thiebaud" :
>
>> I've also put together a 'sample of a bibisect for Windows
>> git://gerrit.libreoffice.org/bibisect-win32-5.0
>> about 400MB
>
>
> I have cloned the repo onto Windows
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Joel Madero wrote:
> Hi All -
>
> Seems like the request for bibisects is growing quickly which is awesome -
> but we need to keep up with those requests :).
On the topic:
I've put together a bibisect for MacOSX covering the 5.0 epoch
git://gerrit.libreoffice.org/
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Michael Meeks
wrote:
>
> * Tinderbox functionality stats (Norbert)
> + what %age of time is green for each platform ?
Here are the precise stats for the past 2 weeks:
Job name#-Successful#-Failed#-Total Builds-Failure Rate
lo_gerrit_master-101-140-241-58.09%
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Kohei Yoshida
wrote:
>
> And also, my comment was never meant as a criticism of "someone not
> doing the job". It was rather a simple piece of feedback that I hoped
> would be useful for future hackfest planning.
>
> So, let's not take this as a "failure" please.
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Joel Madero wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Anyone with Windows Mobile installed?
>
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50090&list_id=450303
>
food for thought:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Mobile#Market_share
Windows Mobile (latest version 6.5) is dead a
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Sophie wrote:
>> I would like to receive some
>> explanations about faggots and snitches in its public-faced parts
>> being the QA community.
>
> What sort of answer do you expect? You want us to escalate on non sense?
OK sophie, I'm convinced...
As I said before
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Michael Meeks
wrote:
> + need to get bugzilla migration bits under gerrit so we can get
> patches.
> + QA team eager to help out.
It is already. I have added a bugzilla repo under gerrit to track
upstream with prod/test/dev branches.
I need to
I upload a bibisect repo for macosx... covering master from the 4.2 branch point
to roughly end of February
Norbert
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [email protected]
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.or
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Michael Meeks
wrote:
>
> * Editeng indexing change (Norbert/Kohei)
> + spell-checking currently broken in master, but works in 4.2
> AI + have a look into it (Norbert)
Done
Norbert
___
List Name: Libreoffice-q
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Jean Weber wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Jean Weber wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>>>
>>> I used the regular (32-bit) build, which the download page suggest
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Jean Weber wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> I used the regular (32-bit) build, which the download page suggested,
> and which I have always used. Should I be using the 64-bit build? I'll
> try that today.
both should work for 10.9... I would just like a confirmation tha
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Jean Weber wrote:
> Mac OS X 10.9. Getting error message when attempting to start (open)
> the app after installing: "LibreOffice.app is damaged and can't be
> opened. You should move it to the trash."
>
> This problem also occured with the Beta2, and Norbert said
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Terrence Enger wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 23:14 +0700, Korrawit Pruegsanusak wrote:
>> Hello Ken, all,
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Ken Biondi
> wrote:
>> > Unfortunately neither git checkout . nor git clean -fd, git reset
> --hard
>> > solved my pr
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
> Up at the top of your email you said:
> "I'm sorry I apparently started a bikeshed on this..."
>
> ...but the length and breadth of your email belies that
> characterization of this particular decision about abbreviations. This
> is clearly n
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Ken Biondi wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> While attempting bibisect I got the following error:
>
>
> ken@ubuntu:/media/LACIE/LO-Bibisect/Bibi4/bibisect40$ git checkout oldest
> error: Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by
> checkout:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
> I felt like I was working hard to go through appropriate channels.
> Perhaps if I'd spent more time I could've gotten more input from other
> groups, but at this point I feel like I've already spent a ton of time
> on just this one little pie
unsigned 4.2 beta2 is uploaded.. the language pack are being
uploaded.. ETA another 45 minutes or so to finish all the language
pack and the sdk
Norbert
PS: note that is on the pre-release section .. cloph would have to
propagate that to the mirror somehow (/me does not know how that
works)
_
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
> I guess there should be a small announcement for bughunters that OS X
> version will follow later, so there will not be much frustration.
I suspect that the problem is with code-signing of non-release
build... I will prolly just disable t
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
> Please notify when it is uploded. The version I downloaded at 8:45 CET (15
> mins ago) still had the problem.
yes i cancelled it midway as it was unclear that it was related to an
upload problem (and upload are long and expensive from her
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> sure but the dev need to use the canonical abbreviation because we
>> have bot that use them to detect association between commit and bugs
>> that is no
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Jean Weber wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Norbert Thiebaud
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
>>> Hi, Norbert,
>>>
>>> as you can read from bug report, I am running it on 10.9, t
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>>>
>>> The devs really like lo# (as it gives them more room in commit
>>> messages),
>>
>> Yeah, and it is the dev that have to type it a l
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Eike Rathke wrote:
>>
>>> > * lo
>> 1st rank. YES!
>>...
>>> > * lobz
>> No, too long. Lobster, anyone?
>>
>> From my view of a developer who has to type and squeeze these into the
>> alreay short enough commi
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
> Hi, Norbert,
>
> as you can read from bug report, I am running it on 10.9, the system that
> majority or at least a big number of LO users on OS X will want to run it
> on.
>
and as I said below.. I _did_ download the beta2 build to a 10.9
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as the bughunt is nearing, I am re-reporting this, I hope it's just on my
> computer, otherwise it is a blocker:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71884
what mac os version are you running... ?
I downloaded the beta
088e86b865062dd4cc5ba0c85c6068dea62238db
Note the log of that repo looks like:
commit c5b9a799f9d24eba970966f1afabfe931574e933
Author: Norbert Thiebaud
Date: Tue Dec 3 12:48:46 2013 -0600
source sha:80373a6969fd8d3c19231041e465372cf03f53f2
source sha:80373a6969fd8d3c19231041e465372cf03f53f2
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Italo Vignoli wrote:
> On 04/12/13 17:12, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>
>> Did you install a language-pack ? _before_ running Libreoffice for the
>> first time ?
>
> To install LO 4.2 Beta you must get rid of the security check for
&
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Italo Vignoli wrote:
> On 23/11/13 17:47, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>
>> http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/
>
> Hi, I have downloaded and installed the Mac version, but once installed
> - apparently without problems - when I double click the icon I ge
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:21 AM, bjoern wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 07:09:06AM -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> With the expeirence of setting a large bugzilla up likewe need... it
>> should not be that hard to creat a separate instance for infra...and
>> in the futur
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 5:12 AM, bjoern wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 06:51:55PM -0500, Robinson Tryon wrote:
>> The nice thing with putting everything under a "LibreOffice"
>> bugtracker for now is that if in the future we do decide to migrate
>> bugtracking for TDF-specific web infra to a sep
> Am 01.12.2013 19:31, schrieb Robinson Tryon:
>>> * lo
for the sake of concision I'd prefer that one. remeber that commit
message would contain it aka lo# and real-estate is very sparse
on the 'summary' line of a commit.
>>> * blo
fine size wise... but I just do not associate it with the intente
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
>
> Hmm...a lag of a week in the bibisect repo could be a deal-breaker for
> QA members who try to test with daily builds, especially the members
> who build LO on their own machines right now.
I'm sorry but these are orthogonal issue.
1/ bib
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
>
> You say "the TDF tb box" -- do you mean multiple boxes?
yes
>
>> They will upload their install-dir (tar.gz) in a staging area in tdf infra
>> and these will be stitched together later...
>
> automatically, I hope? The QA Team has been exp
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 1:00 PM, bfoman wrote:
> Hi!
> Apart from availability of daily builds is it possible to increase the
> storage space available for tinderbox builds? Seems currently only 14 latest
> builds of each branch are available (when all works like expected). This
> doesn't allow to
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
>
> I believe that the relationship would be 1 tb building into 1 bibisect
> repo;
Nope.
I intend to have the TDF tb box build a daily 'for bibisect' build
using a common config
once a day but at different time of the day...
They will upload
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Robinson Tryon
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Norbert Thiebaud
> wrote:
>> my intention is
>> have some tb upload tar.gz installation regularely in a dumping zone
>> per platform
>> have a cron to regularely.. s
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:38 AM, bjoern
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:17:07AM -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> I do not. That OTRS stuff was set-up by infra when gerrit came online.
>> I never asked for it, and find it utterly confusing.
>
> Thats not the point. The
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Michael Meeks
wrote:
> + who uses OTRS ? (Michael)
> + Bjoern / David / Norbert
I do not. That OTRS stuff was set-up by infra when gerrit came online.
I never asked for it, and find it utterly confusing.
Norbert
__
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 11:17 AM, bjoern
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 06:04:25PM +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
>> I just saw that you made this available on gerrit.libreoffice.org, it seems.
>> Did you talk to the Infra guys about this? AFAIK, they had severe
>> reservations
>> about doing
'release'.. and the git repo contain
the resulting LibreOffice.app
I'm hoping to have a first version of that repo with everything up to
the libreoffice-4-2 branch point, uploaded by next week...
Note: that bibisect-43-dev repo will look like
commit 136674a206cb534c0c7219155b6c381d297
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> >> "yeah! ask them (developers) to give you back your
>> >> money".
>>
>> >I have a fairly complete log, but I cannot find such exchange in
>> > libreoffice-dev
>
>
> That sounds exactly as something I would say, so I can volunteer as the
>
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Mateusz Zasuwik wrote:
>
> The only thing I imply is that new major release is enhanced by
> useless formats. These files are dead, they come from dead software
> and in bugzilla system you won't find even one bugreport relevant to!
And notheless someone bothered
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Florian Reisinger wrote:
>
> http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/MASTER/status.html
>
> tb39
>
>
> Found here, but not here: http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/master/
Because (thankfully) not all tinderbox upload dailies.
We do need to get together and assign
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Florian Reisinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Am 11.07.2013 um 18:45 schrieb Michael Meeks :
>
> * Completed Action items:
>+ get windows build-bot setup (Kendy)
>[ running well, one of the fastest tinderboxes,
> doing incremental Windows builds of mas
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Pedro wrote:
> Norbert Thiebaud wrote
>> The former is what I expect from a daily-build out of a given buildbot
>> - since there can be multiple source for them for a given platform
>>
>> The later is what I expect out of 'release
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Pedro wrote:
> 2)
>
> The About dialog is wrong again in Alpha 1... it seems to be correct every
> other day...
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58034
>
> It should be something like
>
> Version: 4.1.0.0.alpha1
> Build ID: 67ce08e2c64a6615abc90d3a3c442
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 16:16 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote:
>> > + "Do not submit" ->
>> > "I would prefer this not to be committed in this state."
>>
>> While the rewording for -1 is fine with me and in general also better
>> des
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Pedro wrote:
> Hi Michael
>
>
> You want to know the host it was built on ? sounds like a reasonable
> request to me - though it's somewhat unclear how that should be
> configured / propagated from machine to machine.
>
> If the Tinderbox naming followed y
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 20:24 +0200, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Petr Mladek wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > there have been created the libreoffice-3.6.3.2 tag (aka rc2)[*]. The
>
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there have been created the libreoffice-3.6.3.2 tag (aka rc2)[*]. The
> corresponding official builds will be available within next few days.
> It will be used as final if no blocker is found.
>
> See the attached list of changes agains
Using W2008R2_20-With-Symbol-Bytemark-Hosting I've been building a
bibisect repo for windows. I've collected 66 version so far. the repo
is 436MB
you can fetch it with
git clone git://gandalf.documentfoundation.org/bibisect_windows
I'd like to know it if is usable and or usefull... if so I will
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
> * Pending Action Items
> + notify all committers when we have a nice simple, minimal
> statement of what is required for gerrit written (Bjoern)
Done
___
List Name: Libreoffice-q
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Roman Eisele wrote:
> I have considered that, but I was not sure who should do it; I don't
> think that I have the authority to write to anyone and to reprimand him.
Sure you do, like everybody else.
'Community standard/Decency' are best enforced by the communi
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 1:02 AM, David Tardon wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 10:51:25AM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
>> So -- people with commit rights are not the issue:
>> - can commit directly to master on their own responsibility
>> (this should be discouraged, except for urgent buildbre
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
>
> * Quality of round-robin patch review (Markus)
> + often generalists review specific patches for master
> + gerrit should be able to help (Norbert)
> + queueing and checking them
> + one-day timeou
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Francois Tigeot wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 09:09:34AM -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Francois Tigeot
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 04:11:18PM +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
>> &
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 04:11:18PM +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
>>
>> * tinderboxen / status (Norbert)
>> + bytemark machine #2
>> + working on *BSD in virtualbox with little
>> joy help apprecia
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I understand the straw-man concept
Since that is a common rhetorical tools:
"A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy
based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a
straw man" is to
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:54 AM, Pedro wrote:
>
> Is this the plan forward? Only versions x.x.0 have Betas?
x.y.x with z >= 1 are bugfixes-release.. if they need a 'beta' then we
already failed on the principle of what a bugfix-release is.
Norbert
___
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Christian Lohmaier
wrote:
> Hi Francois, *,
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Francois Tigeot wrote:
>> [...]
>> Howewer, this tag doesn't appear in my freshly updated copy of the core
>> repository. How come ?
>
> Need to ask git developers why tags are not t
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there have been created the libreoffice-3.4.99.1 tag for 3.5.0-beta1 release.
> The corresponding official builds will be available within 4 days or so.
>
Mac OSX x86 build uploading now at
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releas
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Timesstamps are _not_ a valid reference to a source tree or order in DSCM.(*)
> Never. Not even on Sunday in moonlight.
>
> The only valid reference is the commit-id. IMHO this should really end the
> discussion right here.
>
+1
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>> I know, I did it... but you don't have a 'push time'
>
> :) Thank you, then :)
> Why do I need to know the push time? Any commits that were pushed into
> Central repository before time X are included in the source that is
> pulled after time X..
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
> Hi Norbert
>
>> the problem is that this 'time' is not recorded anywhere. git does not
>> keep track of it.
>
> I have the pull time because the tinderbox code was kindly modified to
> provide a log file for each build
> E.g.
> http://dev-builds
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>> But developers don't commit to the central repository. They commit to
>> their local "clones" of it, and then at some (much) later stage push
>> outstanding commits to the central repository. And then there are
>> feature branches and merges...
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Cor Nouws píše v So 03. 12. 2011 v 18:23 +0100:
>> Pedro Lino wrote (03-12-11 11:23)
>> > I hope that _at least_ they make DAMN sure that Beta1 doesn't
>> > overwrite the stable build...
>>
>> To be honest: I have no idea. I just install zillion
78 matches
Mail list logo
