On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Johannes wrote:
i would like to file a request to sourceforge that they remove the ":pserver:anonymous@cvs.gridflow.ca:/" directory from the pd-repository. reasoning:
- the entire tree is obviously supposed to be a mirror of another
repository which is hosted somewhere else
- the name is obviously a mistake; it should read "gridflow" instead of
":pserver:anonymous@cvs.gridflow.ca:/home/cvs/gridflow"
- since the initial checkin one year ago not a single submit has been done
Yeah, you wrote to me about this once last year but I forgot to reply to it (I am sorry). I agree with this. It was one of my failed attempts to use "cvs import", which I won't try to use anymore. What I wanted to do is copy cvs.gridflow.ca:/home/cvs/gridflow into pd/externals.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:26:06PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Johannes wrote:
- the entire tree is obviously supposed to be a mirror of another
repository which is hosted somewhere else
What I wanted to do is copy cvs.gridflow.ca:/home/cvs/gridflow into pd/externals.
I similarly need to get my abstractions into SF CVS, but my abstractions are hosted in an SVN repository. One great feature of SVN is the ability to have 'external' directories in a repository. This means that I could place an 'external' into the SF repository, pointing to my own repository, and when I change something I wouldn't have to commit the changes to two different locations (my own repository and also the SF one). I could just commit them to my own repository, and when users check out SF repository they automatically get s-abstractions from my own repository (and that goes for the pd-extended builds too).
I guess what I am getting at is; are we still transitioning to SVN? Can we do it soon, because it will make my life much easier. :)
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
Hallo, Chris McCormick hat gesagt: // Chris McCormick wrote:
I guess what I am getting at is; are we still transitioning to SVN? Can we do it soon, because it will make my life much easier. :)
I don't think we will transition to svn any time soon.
Every time I suggested to do that, the discussion turned into a discussion about how sh*tty Sourceforge is and that we should leave it and go somewhere else, and then everyone suggested his favourite "somewhere else" and then everything stayed as it was.
Ciao
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 08:51:10AM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Chris McCormick hat gesagt: // Chris McCormick wrote:
I guess what I am getting at is; are we still transitioning to SVN? Can we do it soon, because it will make my life much easier. :)
I don't think we will transition to svn any time soon.
Every time I suggested to do that, the discussion turned into a discussion about how sh*tty Sourceforge is and that we should leave it and go somewhere else, and then everyone suggested his favourite "somewhere else" and then everything stayed as it was.
Yep, I've read some of those discussions in the archives, and also as they were happening. The last thing I want is to throw petrol on the fire; I just want to get my s-abstractions into pd-extended with minimum fuss.
What were the hosting options? Let's summarise them with concise clear language so we can cut to the chase and get this moving:
1. IEM? (is this an option?) pros: cons: lots of work for IOhannes.
2. savanna.nongnu.org pros: cons:
3. Rent a dedicated server. pros: we have total control. cons: we have to install and set up. costs money.
Please contribute to the above, anyone who cares to (but keep it brief and on topic so we don't end up with essays that solve nothing).
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
Chris McCormick wrote:
- IEM? (is this an option?)
pros: cons: lots of work for IOhannes.
- savanna.nongnu.org
pros: cons:
- Rent a dedicated server.
pros: we have total control. cons: we have to install and set up. costs money.
i do not fully understand the difference between 1. and 3. we could rent a dedicated server at the IEM :-)
as for savanna: how is this different from just staying at sourceforge?
mfg.asdr IOhannes
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:50:00AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
- IEM? (is this an option?)
pros: cons: lots of work for IOhannes.
- savanna.nongnu.org
pros: cons:
- Rent a dedicated server.
pros: we have total control. cons: we have to install and set up. costs money.
i do not fully understand the difference between 1. and 3. we could rent a dedicated server at the IEM :-)
We can? Ok. If we rent, we would need to evaluate the different options for price, features, etc.
I was under the impression that the IEM option was IEM donating server resources with yourself doing the administration.
as for savanna: how is this different from just staying at sourceforge?
We know the SF sucks. Do we have evidence that Savanna sucks?
Let's add an option:
4. Stay at sourceforge but transition to SVN. pros: easy. cons: SF sucks.
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
Chris McCormick wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:50:00AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
- IEM? (is this an option?)
pros: cons: lots of work for IOhannes.
- savanna.nongnu.org
pros: cons:
- Rent a dedicated server.
pros: we have total control. cons: we have to install and set up. costs money.
i do not fully understand the difference between 1. and 3. we could rent a dedicated server at the IEM :-)
We can? Ok. If we rent, we would need to evaluate the different options for price, features, etc.
organizatorical i don't know whether this would be possible (from the university side).
but puredata.info _is_ a dedicated server (not just a vhost or something). so the difference between 1 and 3 is, that the iem pays for #1 while somebody else would have to pay for #3.
i have the impression (being administrator of this server), that we (that is: the pd-community) do have full control of puredata.info. obviously not everybody has root access to this machine, but i doubt whether it would be a good idea to give everyone root-access to a rented server (#3).
I was under the impression that the IEM option was IEM donating server resources with yourself doing the administration.
yes you are correct, but how does this differ from 3 (see above)
as for savanna: how is this different from just staying at sourceforge?
We know the SF sucks. Do we have evidence that Savanna sucks?
i do not have evidence that savanna sucks. but i'd rather have evidence that it does not suck, before going there.
Let's add an option:
- Stay at sourceforge but transition to SVN.
pros: easy. cons: SF sucks.
honestly, i think it does not suck so badly. (they _did_ have hardware problems last year, which was unbearable; but this could happen to every hoster, be it savanna, iem or sourceforge.)
i still vote for either staying at sf or going to iem. the main reason for this is the user-migration.
somebody should come up with a good layout ofthe svn-repository (actually i think that this is the point where all the former attempts died)
and finally one call for help to all those subversion/ldap experts out there: an administrative problem i do have at puredata.info is, how to handle permissions (that is: write-access to sub-branches of the repository) effectively. i would like to give a diffuse group of "developers" (which are all members of an LDAP-group) write access to the entire repository, except for some special branches, e.g. pd-vanilla, where only miller (and some admins) have write access. i guess the simplest way to acchieve the latter (special permissions on sub-trees) would be to just manage an access.conf file via the puredata.info homepage.
for the former, does anybody know how to handle ldap-groups in subversion? is this possible at all??
mfga.sdr IOhannes
Hi Johannes,It is indeed possible to use LDAP group permissions with SVN when using it with Apache (which is how I've always run it). http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Apache2_with_subversion_SVN_and_DAV http://blogs.open.collab.net/svn/2007/03/subversion_ldap.html
I'd be happy to help with that.
Running SVN would give us access to the wonderful SVN::Notify, which I've attached a screenshot of.
And just as a reassurance for the IEM option, I've found SVN to be pretty light on resource use. There are only a few developers committing on any single day here.
Cheers Luke
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 12:56:05PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:50:00AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
but puredata.info _is_ a dedicated server (not just a vhost or something). so the difference between 1 and 3 is, that the iem pays for #1 while somebody else would have to pay for #3.
yep.
i have the impression (being administrator of this server), that we (that is: the pd-community) do have full control of puredata.info. obviously not everybody has root access to this machine, but i doubt whether it would be a good idea to give everyone root-access to a rented server (#3).
agree.
I was under the impression that the IEM option was IEM donating server resources with yourself doing the administration.
yes you are correct, but how does this differ from 3 (see above)
With 1, IEM are involved and you must do the administration. With 3, they aren't involved, we must pay, and anyone nominated by this list can do the administration. I don't mind either way, as long as the job gets done (but I feel bad that the IEM option incurs lots of work for you).
as for savanna: how is this different from just staying at sourceforge?
We know the SF sucks. Do we have evidence that Savanna sucks?
i do not have evidence that savanna sucks. but i'd rather have evidence that it does not suck, before going there.
Yep, agree.
somebody should come up with a good layout ofthe svn-repository (actually i think that this is the point where all the former attempts died)
To my mind, migrating to SVN and re-organisation of the repository are two separate tasks. Why not migrate first, and re-organise second?
I am happy with switching to SVN on SF, but I am concerned about Frank's point about there being no fine grained control over directory permissions. However, is this much worse than what we have now? To me it seems it's only better because we would be using the feature rich SVN as opposed to CVS.
for the former, does anybody know how to handle ldap-groups in subversion? is this possible at all??
What do you think of Luke's suggestions?
Before we do anything, we should make sure that the majority of this list is happy with the final decision on hosting + source control software.
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
Hi, What about a SVN at goto10.org ?
a
2007/7/4, Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 12:56:05PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:50:00AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
but puredata.info _is_ a dedicated server (not just a vhost or something). so the difference between 1 and 3 is, that the iem pays for #1 while somebody else would have to pay for #3.
yep.
i have the impression (being administrator of this server), that we (that is: the pd-community) do have full control of puredata.info. obviously not everybody has root access to this machine, but i doubt whether it would be a good idea to give everyone root-access to a rented server (#3).
agree.
I was under the impression that the IEM option was IEM donating server resources with yourself doing the administration.
yes you are correct, but how does this differ from 3 (see above)
With 1, IEM are involved and you must do the administration. With 3, they aren't involved, we must pay, and anyone nominated by this list can do the administration. I don't mind either way, as long as the job gets done (but I feel bad that the IEM option incurs lots of work for you).
as for savanna: how is this different from just staying at sourceforge?
We know the SF sucks. Do we have evidence that Savanna sucks?
i do not have evidence that savanna sucks. but i'd rather have evidence that it does not suck, before going there.
Yep, agree.
somebody should come up with a good layout ofthe svn-repository (actually i think that this is the point where all the former attempts died)
To my mind, migrating to SVN and re-organisation of the repository are two separate tasks. Why not migrate first, and re-organise second?
I am happy with switching to SVN on SF, but I am concerned about Frank's point about there being no fine grained control over directory permissions. However, is this much worse than what we have now? To me it seems it's only better because we would be using the feature rich SVN as opposed to CVS.
for the former, does anybody know how to handle ldap-groups in subversion? is this possible at all??
What do you think of Luke's suggestions?
Before we do anything, we should make sure that the majority of this list is happy with the final decision on hosting + source control software.
Chris.
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Hallo, Alexandre Quessy hat gesagt: // Alexandre Quessy wrote:
What about a SVN at goto10.org ?
We at goto10 discussed this internally some time ago, but decided at that time that for such a big project as the Pd-CVS we lack the (human and technical) resources to support it as it would deserve. Or am I remembering this wrong, my fellow GOTO10 readers?
Ciao
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 07:05:49PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Alexandre Quessy hat gesagt: // Alexandre Quessy wrote:
What about a SVN at goto10.org ?
We at goto10 discussed this internally some time ago, but decided at that time that for such a big project as the Pd-CVS we lack the (human and technical) resources to support it as it would deserve.
Well it seems to me that there are three tasks that we need to accomplish here:
1. Transitioning to a more feature rich source management system. 2. Moving the repository to a more reliable machine that we have control over. 3. Sorting out the structure of the repository.
I think that we could do them in any order, but for selfish reasons i'd like to prioritise 1, and suggest SVN, since it will make my own task of including s-abstractions in pd-extended much easier.
Thoughts?
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
Hallo, Chris McCormick hat gesagt: // Chris McCormick wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 07:05:49PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Alexandre Quessy hat gesagt: // Alexandre Quessy wrote:
What about a SVN at goto10.org ?
We at goto10 discussed this internally some time ago, but decided at that time that for such a big project as the Pd-CVS we lack the (human and technical) resources to support it as it would deserve.
Well it seems to me that there are three tasks that we need to accomplish here:
- Transitioning to a more feature rich source management system.
Which veryvery likely will be Svn.
- Moving the repository to a more reliable machine that we have control
over.
Matju pointed out, Sourceforge became quite reliable, it's just not as flexible in regard to user/access management.
- Sorting out the structure of the repository.
Um, yes. ;)
I think that we could do them in any order, but for selfish reasons i'd like to prioritise 1, and suggest SVN, since it will make my own task of including s-abstractions in pd-extended much easier.
Maybe it would be a good idea to try to organize a repository management workshop or panel or so during the pd~convention. I guess, most people involved in the repository will be there and it may be easier to deal with these issues face to face.
Ciao
On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 07:21:37AM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Maybe it would be a good idea to try to organize a repository management workshop or panel or so during the pd~convention. I guess, most people involved in the repository will be there and it may be easier to deal with these issues face to face.
Sounds good! I will stop pestering the list about it then and wait until after pd~convention to commit s-abstractions when there is some resolution about the repository.
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
On Jul 6, 2007, at 6:02 AM, Chris McCormick wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 07:21:37AM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Maybe it would be a good idea to try to organize a repository management workshop or panel or so during the pd~convention. I guess, most people involved in the repository will be there and it may be easier to deal with these issues face to face.
Sounds good! I will stop pestering the list about it then and wait until after pd~convention to commit s-abstractions when there is some resolution about the repository.
It doesn't take much to commit stuff to the CVS. I'd say it wouldn't hurt to do it now.
.hc
Best,
Chris.
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from scarcity." -John Gilmore
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 10:33:56PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Jul 6, 2007, at 6:02 AM, Chris McCormick wrote:
Sounds good! I will stop pestering the list about it then and wait until after pd~convention to commit s-abstractions when there is some resolution about the repository.
It doesn't take much to commit stuff to the CVS. I'd say it wouldn't hurt to do it now.
Well as it stands now I'd have the annoying requirement that I keep two local copies of s-abstractions and have to manually port changes between them and commit to two different repositories, which was the reason for my original post. I am very forgetful, and I am certain that the SF repository would fall out of date as I'd forget to commit to that repository each time I made a change.
I'm happy to wait until we've resolved the repository issues before importing my abstractions.
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
On Jul 9, 2007, at 1:44 AM, Chris McCormick wrote:
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 10:33:56PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Jul 6, 2007, at 6:02 AM, Chris McCormick wrote:
Sounds good! I will stop pestering the list about it then and wait until after pd~convention to commit s-abstractions when there is some resolution about the repository.
It doesn't take much to commit stuff to the CVS. I'd say it wouldn't hurt to do it now.
Well as it stands now I'd have the annoying requirement that I keep two local copies of s-abstractions and have to manually port changes between them and commit to two different repositories, which was the reason for my original post. I am very forgetful, and I am certain that the SF repository would fall out of date as I'd forget to commit to that repository each time I made a change.
I'm happy to wait until we've resolved the repository issues before importing my abstractions.
If you are going to maintain your code in a repository that is different from the pure-data one, then it makes the most sense to only import releases into the pure-data CVS, instead of keeping it synced. "cvs import" allows you to do this with one command that also makes a tag for that release.
.hc
Best,
Chris.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
"...information-sharing is a powerful positive good, and... it is an ethical duty of hackers to share their expertise by writing open- source code and facilitating access to information and to computing resources wherever possible." - Eric Raymond
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 07:49:29AM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Well as it stands now I'd have the annoying requirement that I keep two local copies of s-abstractions and have to manually port changes between them and commit to two different repositories, which was the reason for my original post.
If you are going to maintain your code in a repository that is different from the pure-data one, then it makes the most sense to only import releases into the pure-data CVS, instead of keeping it synced. "cvs import" allows you to do this with one command that also makes a tag for that release.
Ok, I'm convinced. I haven't used CVS import like that before; I wonder if you could point me to some docs on that, or give me an example. Would it be something like:
export CVSROOT=chr15m@pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/pure-data cvs login cvs import s-abstractions/
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Chris McCormick wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 07:49:29AM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Well as it stands now I'd have the annoying requirement that I keep two local copies of s-abstractions and have to manually port changes between them and commit to two different repositories, which was the reason for my original post.
If you are going to maintain your code in a repository that is different from the pure-data one, then it makes the most sense to only import releases into the pure-data CVS, instead of keeping it synced. "cvs import" allows you to do this with one command that also makes a tag for that release.
Ok, I'm convinced. I haven't used CVS import like that before; I wonder if you could point me to some docs on that, or give me an example. Would it be something like:
export CVSROOT=chr15m@pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/pure-data cvs login cvs import s-abstractions/
More like this:
export CVSROOT=:ext:chr15m@pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/ pure-data export CVS_RSH=ssh cd s-abstractions cvs import abstractions/s-abstractions CHR15M S-ABSTRACTIONS_0_2
It goes like this: cvs import repository vendor-tag release-tags...
repository - the full path to the spot in the CVS repository where this stuff will go. This could be instead: externals/s-abstractions, abstractions/chr15m/s-abstractions, etc. etc.
vendor-tag - whatever tag you want for yourself, standardized to UPPERCASE
release-tags - a tag for the library and version that you are importing (multiple if you want, only one required)
.hc
Best,
Chris.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits. - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Hi all, seems like the s-abstraction folder has already been checked in, because now all the .svn subfolders are in the CVS... that's not exactly what was intended, i guess. greetings, Thomas
Hans-Christoph Steiner schrieb:
On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Chris McCormick wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 07:49:29AM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Well as it stands now I'd have the annoying requirement that I keep two local copies of s-abstractions and have to manually port changes between them and commit to two different repositories, which was the reason for my original post.
If you are going to maintain your code in a repository that is different from the pure-data one, then it makes the most sense to only import releases into the pure-data CVS, instead of keeping it synced. "cvs import" allows you to do this with one command that also makes a tag for that release.
Ok, I'm convinced. I haven't used CVS import like that before; I wonder if you could point me to some docs on that, or give me an example. Would it be something like:
export CVSROOT=chr15m@pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/pure-data cvs login cvs import s-abstractions/
More like this:
export CVSROOT=:ext:chr15m@pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/ pure-data export CVS_RSH=ssh cd s-abstractions cvs import abstractions/s-abstractions CHR15M S-ABSTRACTIONS_0_2
It goes like this: cvs import repository vendor-tag release-tags...
repository - the full path to the spot in the CVS repository where this stuff will go. This could be instead: externals/s-abstractions, abstractions/chr15m/s-abstractions, etc. etc.
vendor-tag - whatever tag you want for yourself, standardized to UPPERCASE
release-tags - a tag for the library and version that you are importing (multiple if you want, only one required)
.hc
Best,
Chris.
I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits. - Martin Luther King, Jr.
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 11:03:47AM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:
seems like the s-abstraction folder has already been checked in, because now all the .svn subfolders are in the CVS... that's not exactly what was intended, i guess.
Hi Thomas,
Yep, I screwed up. Will fix ASAP.
Best,
Chris.
------------------- http://mccormick.cx
On Jul 9, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Chris McCormick wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 07:49:29AM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Well as it stands now I'd have the annoying requirement that I keep two local copies of s-abstractions and have to manually port changes between them and commit to two different repositories, which was the reason for my original post.
If you are going to maintain your code in a repository that is different from the pure-data one, then it makes the most sense to only import releases into the pure-data CVS, instead of keeping it synced. "cvs import" allows you to do this with one command that also makes a tag for that release.
Ok, I'm convinced. I haven't used CVS import like that before; I wonder if you could point me to some docs on that, or give me an example. Would it be something like:
export CVSROOT=chr15m@pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/pure-data cvs login cvs import s-abstractions/
Oops, forgot the link:
http://ximbiot.com/cvs/manual/cvs-1.12.9/cvs_13.html
.hc
Best,
Chris.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. - Thomas Jefferson
On Jul 6, 2007, at 1:21 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Chris McCormick hat gesagt: // Chris McCormick wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 07:05:49PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Alexandre Quessy hat gesagt: // Alexandre Quessy wrote:
What about a SVN at goto10.org ?
We at goto10 discussed this internally some time ago, but decided at that time that for such a big project as the Pd-CVS we lack the (human and technical) resources to support it as it would deserve.
Well it seems to me that there are three tasks that we need to accomplish here:
- Transitioning to a more feature rich source management system.
Which veryvery likely will be Svn.
- Moving the repository to a more reliable machine that we have
control over.
Matju pointed out, Sourceforge became quite reliable, it's just not as flexible in regard to user/access management.
- Sorting out the structure of the repository.
Um, yes. ;)
I think that we could do them in any order, but for selfish reasons i'd like to prioritise 1, and suggest SVN, since it will make my own task of including s-abstractions in pd-extended much easier.
Maybe it would be a good idea to try to organize a repository management workshop or panel or so during the pd~convention. I guess, most people involved in the repository will be there and it may be easier to deal with these issues face to face.
I think the best plan would be if the people who are interested in leading this project put together a proposal as to how it would be done. Then we can discuss it at PdCon.
.hc
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to realize his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them, or perish. -William Carlos Williams
-
Alexandre Quessy -
Chris McCormick -
Frank Barknecht -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Luke Iannini (pd) -
Mathieu Bouchard -
Thomas Grill