Debian Bug report logs - #435888
ITP: xmlcopyeditor -- fast, validating XML editor

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: RFP: xmlcopyeditor -- Fast, validating XML editor

Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 00:08:27 +0100

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist


* Package name    : xmlcopyeditor
  Version         : 1.1.0
  Upstream Author : Gerald Schmidt <gnschmidt@users.sourceforge.net>
* URL             : http://xml-copy-editor.sourceforge.net/
* License         : GPL
  Programming Lang: C++
  Description     : Fast, validating XML editor

XML Copy Editor is a fast, validating XML editor featuring:

 * DTD/XML Schema/RELAX NG validation
 * XSLT
 * XPath
 * Pretty-printing
 * Syntax highlighting
 * Folding
 * Tag completion
 * Tag locking
 * Tag-free editing
 * Spelling and style check
 * Built-in support for XHTML, XSL, DocBook and TEI

There's an Ubuntu package already; maybe you can use that.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-2-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Message #10 received at 435888@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>

To: 435888@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 435888-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Gerald Schmidt <gnschmidt@users.sourceforge.net>

Subject: A few problems

Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 15:08:46 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

OK, I've taken a quick look at this package and there are a few
problems.

(The "Ubuntu" package mentioned in the RFP is a .deb but it is not
part of Ubuntu and there are serious errors in the packaging of
that .deb) :

1. Nearly all the files in the upstream tarball are executable which is
a PITA and requires a new tarball to be released with only essential
scripts set to executable. (Probably only ./configure.)

2. The package includes loads of XSL that appears to have already been
packaged for Debian and some of that has been modified compared to
upstream. There should be an option supported by ./configure to omit
these files from the 'make install' so that Debian does not have to
carry duplicate XSL files. xmlcopyeditor would then depend on
docbook-xsl and other similar packages that are maintained separately.
If any XSL files remain after these dependencies have been identified,
they can be packaged separately. This may require changes in the
upstream source to use /etc/catalog.xml to locate the correct
stylesheets. (See the datafreedom-qsfxsl package for an example.)
http://packages.debian.org/sid/datafreedom-qsfxsl

3. There are over TWENTY licences claimed within the source! Despite
that, NONE of the source files have any copyright information or any
licence information:
$ sudo apt-get install devscripts
$ licensecheck -r . | grep -c UNKNOWN
111
$ licensecheck -r . | grep -v UNKNOWN
./ltmain.sh: GPL (v2 or later) GENERATED FILE
./src/xmlcopyeditor_private.h: GENERATED FILE

I'm guessing that separating out the XSL from the C++ will mean that
the C++ is under a single licence but that needs to be made explicit,
preferably by specifying the typical copyright and licence header in
every .cpp and .h file:

/***************************************************************************
 *            filename.c
 *
 *  timestamp
 *  Copyright  year  name email
 ****************************************************************************/
/*
    This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
    it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
    the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or
    (at your option) any later version.

    This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
    but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
    MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
    GNU General Public License for more details.

    You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
    along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
>. */
(GPL3 in this example from one of my upstream C projects.)

4. The supported translations are packaged in a non-standard way -
there is no po/ directory, instead arbitrary directories are used to
package the prebuilt messages.mo files. This is a very bad idea as it
prevents translators within Debian from contributing to the translation
effort. The package should use gettext macros and a po/ directory and
package xmlcopyeditor.pot so that translations can be updated and
committed back upstream.

The upstream package is therefore not suitable for Debian at this time.

The final problem is that it requires wxwidgets2.8 when only 2.6 is
currently available in Debian unstable because of various issues - one
of which is the fragility of wxwidgets versions:

> We can't by any sensible measure just keep accruing wx releases in the
> distro.  There are apps still happily using 2.4 because an 'upgrade' to
> 2.6 will break them, though the demise of gtk1 is going to put an end
> to that period of bliss eventually whether they are working or not...
> 
> wx2.6 was rushed out prematurely, because book deadlines apparently
> trump good release management, 2.8 followed fairly shortly after for
> reasons which should be obvious, but not quickly enough to introduce
> another transition into the etch cycle.  Its the release we probably
> should have had in etch, but only very few people I know of had tested
> it with apps that were candidates for the distro, and though there were
> some apps that already would no longer work with 2.6 in their latest
> form, the needs of the many ultimately had to win the hand for etch.
> 
> I don't know of any app that missed inclusion totally from etch for
> this reason.
> 
> So the million dollar question now, is which version do we want to ship
> with Lenny.  2.8 will almost certainly be obsolete by then, and it looks
> like 2.9 is going to totally break everybody's string handling yet again.
> How big a nightmare that proves to be is probably also going to depend
> on how many shortcuts it takes to make an intractable solution meet
> another contractual deadline...
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=403237

So I don't see xmlcopyeditor as a viable candidate for Debian, sorry.
(I don't know if a new release could work with 2.6.)

-- 


Neil Williams
--------------
codehelp@debian.org
codehelpgpg@users.sourceforge.net
=================================
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #18 received at 435888@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "G.N.Schmidt" <G.N.Schmidt@open.ac.uk>

To: "Neil Williams" <codehelp@debian.org>, <435888@bugs.debian.org>

Cc: <435888-submitter@bugs.debian.org>, "Gerald Schmidt" <gnschmidt@users.sourceforge.net>

Subject: RE: A few problems

Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 15:49:07 +0100

Hi Neil

Thanks so much for taking the time to look into the package. I have no
experience of packaging for Debian (and limited experience of packaging
for Fedora) so that I'm very grateful for your advice.

My main development platform is Ubuntu and I was hoping to create *.deb
packages rather than *.rpms soon.

1.
Yes, this is a problem that arose because I carried the files from my
Linux to my Windows partition and vice versa. When copying back from
Windows I found all settings randomised and executable permission
missing where it was required. (This also changed line endings to \r\n
which is annoying and breaks several build tools.) Under pressure of
time I applied chmod indiscriminately; hence the current permissions
mess.

As I'm now using sourceforge's subversion system to keep the files I
hope this problem, once addressed, won't recur.

2.
Fair point. On Windows I had no choice in this regard, but I appreciate
that the Linux build shouldn't come with these XSL stylesheets by
default. May I ask where these stylesheets are saved on a standard Linux
system? Libxml can find the system-wide catalog for DTD access, but I
may need to hardcode paths to XSL files.

3.
Again, fair point. All original code is under GPL except where I have
adapted third-party wxWidgets components for my needs (these are under
wx license). I will add license information to the source files asap.

4.
I am happy to add a po directory and group the translation directories
there. That said, the directories used are not random but the ones in
which gettext locates the relevant translation files. There is also an
empty en_US po file for new translations. So far translators have not
expressed concern about the current arrangement.

<The package should use gettext macros> It does. Getting this to work
with wxGTK is a bit tricky for plurals (you will find I had to redefine
one macro to enable string extraction for these), but I think the
mechanism is otherwise sound.

<The upstream package is therefore not suitable for Debian at this
time.>
That is fine; I quite understand.

<The final problem is that it requires wxwidgets2.8 when only 2.6 is
currently available in Debian unstable because of various issues - one
of which is the fragility of wxwidgets versions:>
This is a serious problem less for my project (which I realise is a tiny
niche project and intended to be such) than for wxGTK as a development
platform on Debian Linux.

wxGTK 2.6.3 is quite buggy and terribly out of date. The stable 2.8.x
series fixed many serious bugs and introduced essential functionality
such as a robust docking library and a greatly enhanced visual
components; other libraries available as wrappers in wxGTK (e.g.
Scintilla, wrapped by wxStyledTextCtrl) are updated only in 2.8.x. In
short, 2.6.3 does not offer an acceptable level of functionality for
cross-platform development. (If my project was Linux-only I'd write it
in straight GTK+.)

To be honest I'm not entirely happy even with the level of functionality
offered in 2.8.x but I don't have the time to convert to Qt at this
point in time. In any case I agree with you that 2.8 introduced too many
incompatibilities: adjusting my code base took some time and larger
projects will have had a major job on their hands. Unfortunately this
also means that I can't backport my program to work with the wxGTK 2.6.x
series.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please let me know!

Regards,
Gerald


-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Williams [mailto:codehelp@debian.org] 
Sent: 05 September 2007 15:09
To: 435888@bugs.debian.org
Cc: 435888-submitter@bugs.debian.org; Gerald Schmidt
Subject: A few problems

OK, I've taken a quick look at this package and there are a few
problems.

(The "Ubuntu" package mentioned in the RFP is a .deb but it is not part
of Ubuntu and there are serious errors in the packaging of that .deb) :

1. Nearly all the files in the upstream tarball are executable which is
a PITA and requires a new tarball to be released with only essential
scripts set to executable. (Probably only ./configure.)

2. The package includes loads of XSL that appears to have already been
packaged for Debian and some of that has been modified compared to
upstream. There should be an option supported by ./configure to omit
these files from the 'make install' so that Debian does not have to
carry duplicate XSL files. xmlcopyeditor would then depend on
docbook-xsl and other similar packages that are maintained separately.
If any XSL files remain after these dependencies have been identified,
they can be packaged separately. This may require changes in the
upstream source to use /etc/catalog.xml to locate the correct
stylesheets. (See the datafreedom-qsfxsl package for an example.)
http://packages.debian.org/sid/datafreedom-qsfxsl

3. There are over TWENTY licences claimed within the source! Despite
that, NONE of the source files have any copyright information or any
licence information:
$ sudo apt-get install devscripts
$ licensecheck -r . | grep -c UNKNOWN
111
$ licensecheck -r . | grep -v UNKNOWN
./ltmain.sh: GPL (v2 or later) GENERATED FILE
./src/xmlcopyeditor_private.h: GENERATED FILE

I'm guessing that separating out the XSL from the C++ will mean that the
C++ is under a single licence but that needs to be made explicit,
preferably by specifying the typical copyright and licence header in
every .cpp and .h file:

/***********************************************************************
****
 *            filename.c
 *
 *  timestamp
 *  Copyright  year  name email
 
************************************************************************
****/
/*
    This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
    it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
    the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or
    (at your option) any later version.

    This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
    but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
    MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
    GNU General Public License for more details.

    You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
    along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
>. */
(GPL3 in this example from one of my upstream C projects.)

4. The supported translations are packaged in a non-standard way - there
is no po/ directory, instead arbitrary directories are used to package
the prebuilt messages.mo files. This is a very bad idea as it prevents
translators within Debian from contributing to the translation effort.
The package should use gettext macros and a po/ directory and package
xmlcopyeditor.pot so that translations can be updated and committed back
upstream.

The upstream package is therefore not suitable for Debian at this time.

The final problem is that it requires wxwidgets2.8 when only 2.6 is
currently available in Debian unstable because of various issues - one
of which is the fragility of wxwidgets versions:

> We can't by any sensible measure just keep accruing wx releases in the

> distro.  There are apps still happily using 2.4 because an 'upgrade' 
> to
> 2.6 will break them, though the demise of gtk1 is going to put an end 
> to that period of bliss eventually whether they are working or not...
> 
> wx2.6 was rushed out prematurely, because book deadlines apparently 
> trump good release management, 2.8 followed fairly shortly after for 
> reasons which should be obvious, but not quickly enough to introduce 
> another transition into the etch cycle.  Its the release we probably 
> should have had in etch, but only very few people I know of had tested

> it with apps that were candidates for the distro, and though there 
> were some apps that already would no longer work with 2.6 in their 
> latest form, the needs of the many ultimately had to win the hand for
etch.
> 
> I don't know of any app that missed inclusion totally from etch for 
> this reason.
> 
> So the million dollar question now, is which version do we want to 
> ship with Lenny.  2.8 will almost certainly be obsolete by then, and 
> it looks like 2.9 is going to totally break everybody's string
handling yet again.
> How big a nightmare that proves to be is probably also going to depend

> on how many shortcuts it takes to make an intractable solution meet 
> another contractual deadline...
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=403237

So I don't see xmlcopyeditor as a viable candidate for Debian, sorry.
(I don't know if a new release could work with 2.6.)

-- 


Neil Williams
--------------
codehelp@debian.org
codehelpgpg@users.sourceforge.net
=================================
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Message #26 received at 435888@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>

To: "G.N.Schmidt" <G.N.Schmidt@open.ac.uk>

Cc: <435888@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: A few problems

Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 16:16:25 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 15:49:07 +0100
"G.N.Schmidt" <G.N.Schmidt@open.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi Neil
> 
> Thanks so much for taking the time to look into the package. I have no
> experience of packaging for Debian (and limited experience of packaging
> for Fedora) so that I'm very grateful for your advice.
> My main development platform is Ubuntu and I was hoping to create *.deb
> packages rather than *.rpms soon.

No problem.

If you want to learn more and would like help with creating a
standard .deb, try the debian-mentors mailing list:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/

and the http://mentors.debian.net website too.
 
> 1.
> Yes, this is a problem that arose because I carried the files from my
> Linux to my Windows partition and vice versa. When copying back from
> Windows I found all settings randomised and executable permission
> missing where it was required. (This also changed line endings to \r\n
> which is annoying and breaks several build tools.) Under pressure of
> time I applied chmod indiscriminately; hence the current permissions
> mess.

Release early, release often; yes.
Release in haste, repent at leisure? Nah.
:-)

> 2.
> Fair point. On Windows I had no choice in this regard, but I appreciate
> that the Linux build shouldn't come with these XSL stylesheets by
> default. May I ask where these stylesheets are saved on a standard Linux
> system? 

Don't access the files directly, use /etc/catalog.xml and then refer to
the stylesheets using a URI. This may look like network access but you
can use --nonet to remove any possible confusion. The URI is mapped via
the catalogues to a file system location so that you don't have to care
where the files are actually located which removes lots of problems
with your package breaking if the XSL is updated.

Take a look at how my datafreedom-qsfxsl package deals
with /etc/catalog.xml - you can find it via the pilot-qof source
package at SourceForge and at:
http://pilot-qof.cvs.sourceforge.net/pilot-qof/pilot-qof/

>Libxml can find the system-wide catalog for DTD access, but I
> may need to hardcode paths to XSL files.

No, you don't.
:-)

Even if you think you have to, you really don't. libxml2 can work
with /etc/catalog.xml, just as xsltproc does - after all, xsltproc
itself uses libxml2 to do that task.

I've made this mistake myself and once you get your head around calling
XSL as: 
xsltproc --nonet -o tmp/ http://www.data-freedom.org/xsl/pilot-qof-address-vcard1.xsl -
it all starts to make sense. 

(Try it, the URI is a 404 but when the catalog is in place via the .deb
package, it works.)

http://pilot-qof.sourceforge.net/manual/ch02.html#vcard1

To use it via bash etc., you just need:
export XML_CATALOG_FILES="/usr/share/xml/datafreedom/xsl/catalog.xml"

i.e. you specify your own catalog.xml that extends the one in /etc/ and
libxml2 merges the catalogues to provide a mapping to the actual XSL
*and* ensures that XSL stylesheets imported by one xsl are correctly
located.

> 3.
> Again, fair point. All original code is under GPL except where I have
> adapted third-party wxWidgets components for my needs (these are under
> wx license). I will add license information to the source files asap.

Excellent.

> 4.
> I am happy to add a po directory and group the translation directories
> there. That said, the directories used are not random but the ones in
> which gettext locates the relevant translation files.

Not random, no, just arbitrary as in you don't control the actual names
of the translation locales and therefore you are likely to come across
ones that are illegal directory names like st@Ltn.

> There is also an
> empty en_US po file for new translations. So far translators have not
> expressed concern about the current arrangement.

The line of least surprise is generally the best advice.
 
> <The package should use gettext macros> It does. Getting this to work
> with wxGTK is a bit tricky for plurals (you will find I had to redefine
> one macro to enable string extraction for these), but I think the
> mechanism is otherwise sound.

OK, gettext can (and does) use plurals but you do need to use gettext
directly rather than glib_gettextize or other macros (I don't know if
wxwidgets has some gettext macro). The problem with gettext is that it
is noisy - it forces you to press Return to confirm what it has done
and therefore it can be awkward to use at the CVS/SVN stage of the
upstream process. Take a look at another of my projects for how that
was handled:
http://gpe-expenses.cvs.sourceforge.net/gpe-expenses/gpe-expenses/

In particular, look at ./autogen.sh and the contents of po/ and po-lib/
(gpe-expenses uses multiple po directories and multiple POT files but
gettext needs one po*/ directory for each, with all the .po files in
the same po*/ directory as the relevant .pot file.)

> wxGTK 2.6.3 is quite buggy and terribly out of date. The stable 2.8.x
> series fixed many serious bugs and introduced essential functionality
> such as a robust docking library and a greatly enhanced visual
> components; other libraries available as wrappers in wxGTK (e.g.
> Scintilla, wrapped by wxStyledTextCtrl) are updated only in 2.8.x. In
> short, 2.6.3 does not offer an acceptable level of functionality for
> cross-platform development. (If my project was Linux-only I'd write it
> in straight GTK+.)

That makes sense.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #31 received at 435888@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org>

To: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>, 435888-quiet@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 435888@bugs.debian.org, 435888-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Gerald Schmidt <gnschmidt@users.sourceforge.net>, Debian BTS <debbugs@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#435888: A few problems

Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 18:45:07 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 5 Sep 2007, Neil Williams wrote:

[A detailed analysis of xml-copy-editor.]

Thanks very much for that, it was most useful to have it all explained.

> The final problem is that it requires wxwidgets2.8 when only 2.6 is
> currently available in Debian unstable because of various issues - one
> of which is the fragility of wxwidgets versions:

As I said in the thread at

  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=403237

this can be fixed by shipping multiple versions, just as several other 
libraries do.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org/ | plagiarism, n.  the mind burgles

Message #44 received at 435888-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: David Moreno Garza <damog@merkel.debian.org>

To: 435888-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: WNPP bug closing

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:59:43 -0600

Hello,

This is an automatic mail sent to close the RFP you have reported or 
are involved with.

Your RFP wnpp bug is being closed because of the following reasons:
- It is, as of today, older than 365 days.
- It hasn't had any activity recently.

As this is an automatic procedure, it could of course have something
wrong and probably it would be closing some bugs that are not 
intended by owners and submitters (like you) to be closed, for
example if the RFP is still of your interest, or there has been 
some kind of activity around it. In that case, please reopen the
bug, do it, DO IT NOW! (I don't want to be blamed because of
mass closing and not let people know that they can easily reopen
their bugs ;-).

To re-open it, you simply have to mail control@bugs.debian.org
with a body text like this:

 reopen 435888
 stop

Further comments on the work done in the bug sent to
435888@bugs.debian.org would be truly welcomed.
Anyway, if you have any kind of problems when dealing with
the BTS, feel free to contact me and I'd be more than happy to help
you on this: <damog@debian.org>.

A similar process is being applied to other kind of wnpp bugs.

Thanks for your cooperation,

 -- David Moreno Garza <damog@debian.org>.
 

Message #55 received at 435888@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mathieu Malaterre <mathieu.malaterre@gmail.com>

To: 435888@bugs.debian.org

Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 14:57:23 +0200

I've reopen bug #435888 because wxWidget 2.8 is now available in debian lenny.

http://packages.debian.org/source/lenny/wxwidgets2.8

Thanks for consideration
-- 
Mathieu

Message #62 received at 435888@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Miriam Ruiz <miriam@debian.org>

To: 435888@bugs.debian.org, control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Uploaded the package for xmlcopyeditor to NEW

Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:23:06 +0100

retitle 435888 ITP: xmlcopyeditor -- fast, validating XML editor
owner 435888 "Miriam Ruiz" <miriam@debian.org>
tag 435888 + pending
thanks

I've already finished the package and it is currently waiting in the NEW queue.

Greetings,
Miry

Message #71 received at 435888-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Miriam Ruiz <little_miry@yahoo.es>

To: 435888-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#435888: fixed in xmlcopyeditor 1.2.0.6-1

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:32:38 +0000

Source: xmlcopyeditor
Source-Version: 1.2.0.6-1

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xmlcopyeditor, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

xmlcopyeditor-dbg_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
  to main/x/xmlcopyeditor/xmlcopyeditor-dbg_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.diff.gz
  to main/x/xmlcopyeditor/xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.diff.gz
xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.dsc
  to main/x/xmlcopyeditor/xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.dsc
xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
  to main/x/xmlcopyeditor/xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6.orig.tar.gz
  to main/x/xmlcopyeditor/xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6.orig.tar.gz



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 435888@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Miriam Ruiz <little_miry@yahoo.es> (supplier of updated xmlcopyeditor package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 06:01:41 +0100
Source: xmlcopyeditor
Binary: xmlcopyeditor xmlcopyeditor-dbg
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.2.0.6-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Miriam Ruiz <little_miry@yahoo.es>
Changed-By: Miriam Ruiz <little_miry@yahoo.es>
Description: 
 xmlcopyeditor - fast, free, validating XML editor
 xmlcopyeditor-dbg - fast, free, validating XML editor - debug
Closes: 435888
Changes: 
 xmlcopyeditor (1.2.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Initial release. Closes: #435888
Checksums-Sha1: 
 7b6686d4214b091dbd91271c5bfce55966e6c557 1231 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.dsc
 b7ccb652fd2084aaa003c63019da5ee1b946f9a6 1519433 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6.orig.tar.gz
 bd02cf8cd587e756f32fe200c9d4a9a856fee550 3543 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.diff.gz
 32529286a01d610e8c55c19e21e9faf9ba0645e4 1414238 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
 f7c873a28df049d196028cb836beb70a224bc5f3 2026582 xmlcopyeditor-dbg_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
Checksums-Sha256: 
 a37527270ca3ad8283f8cf189dca09f301c2d8456311fba9e927a96501918ff3 1231 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.dsc
 ad1b763c3bfafecf97e29aa4bd348ed64ccdfab2741f766282e52d9d00036ec2 1519433 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6.orig.tar.gz
 eac3cff023f812e2886b316cfed428ecb82acfed1621a68a39fd3f12e5f85856 3543 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.diff.gz
 53db9a4ed108e43ec2ae89892acaa13fecccfef91b4da8833b7a2632950a9775 1414238 xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
 c4538a440c371f39741fc9c6a6aa341661dee289b980c8087a02cebfd1005bf8 2026582 xmlcopyeditor-dbg_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
Files: 
 e922cac883f2d5b0d2f619d647befd7d 1231 devel extra xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.dsc
 da83df89bf13947ad5e83f4dfec22539 1519433 devel extra xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6.orig.tar.gz
 f753b8fe5b762006251cfcbd0f8bfca5 3543 devel extra xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1.diff.gz
 85bb76b6462580e215be2d5fa1c015a2 1414238 devel extra xmlcopyeditor_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb
 c4db42365a4c0c207ad632def40c79c7 2026582 debug extra xmlcopyeditor-dbg_1.2.0.6-1_amd64.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAksAGW0ACgkQfbltLjbuCGGhOwCePdXOjPec7cp7j1aHyVsQTgdG
s5QAn1WApnpiENgaQV3CF6rpizOys9q/
=/IAI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.