Bug 9828 - Zebra indexes useless subfields in UNIMARC 6XX
Summary: Zebra indexes useless subfields in UNIMARC 6XX
Status: Failed QA
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Searching (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low minor (vote)
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-03-16 15:01 UTC by Mathieu Saby
Modified: 2022-06-23 07:13 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: Trivial patch
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:


Attachments
[PATCH] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (150.00 KB, patch)
2013-03-16 21:07 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (150.05 KB, patch)
2013-04-03 13:01 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (149.32 KB, patch)
2013-10-24 20:38 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 1/2] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (91.22 KB, patch)
2014-08-18 21:01 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 2/2] Bug 9828 : Add and fix comments in UNIMARC biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml (49.09 KB, patch)
2014-08-18 21:04 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED OFF] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (91.43 KB, patch)
2014-08-19 02:32 UTC, Nick Clemens
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED OFF] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (91.43 KB, patch)
2014-08-19 02:36 UTC, Nick Clemens
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED OFF] Bug 9828 : Add and fix comments in UNIMARC biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml (49.11 KB, patch)
2014-08-19 02:38 UTC, Nick Clemens
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 3/3] Bug 9828 : Followup for Queryparser and deletion of useless 6XX$9 (13.33 KB, patch)
2014-08-20 15:25 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[SIGNED OFF] Bug 9828 : Followup for Queryparser and deletion of useless 6XX$9 (13.35 KB, patch)
2014-08-23 00:36 UTC, Nick Clemens
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (91.46 KB, patch)
2014-10-09 19:31 UTC, Paul Poulain
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 9828 : Add and fix comments in UNIMARC biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml (49.15 KB, patch)
2014-10-09 19:31 UTC, Paul Poulain
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 9828 : Followup for Queryparser and deletion of useless 6XX$9 (13.39 KB, patch)
2014-10-09 19:32 UTC, Paul Poulain
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 1/3] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (86.97 KB, patch)
2014-10-25 11:05 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 1/3] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields (86.94 KB, patch)
2014-10-25 12:17 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 2/3] Bug 9828 : Add and fix comments in UNIMARC biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml (68.95 KB, patch)
2014-10-25 12:17 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 3/3] Bug 9828 : Followup for Queryparser and deletion of useless 6XX$9 (12.88 KB, patch)
2014-10-25 12:18 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
[PATCH 4/4] Bug 9828 - Delete a duplicate line in queryparser.yaml (1.00 KB, patch)
2014-10-28 23:39 UTC, Mathieu Saby
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
Bug 9828 - Delete a duplicate line in queryparser.yaml (1.05 KB, patch)
2014-12-19 13:28 UTC, Jonathan Druart
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mathieu Saby 2013-03-16 15:01:10 UTC
Most of 6XX may contain a $2 that identifies the system used for indexing. It should not be indexed.
In French libraries, $2 contains "rameau". So searching books about the music composer "Rameau" retreive thousands of records!
For some 6XX fiels, other subfields should not be indexed, for example 600$t (dates of persons).
And indexing of $j,$x,$y,$z subdivision could be improved by indexing them in specific indexes

M. Saby
Comment 1 Mathieu Saby 2013-03-16 20:45:36 UTC
Additionnally, subject indexing could be improved by using specific indexes for each 6XX if possible.
In ccl.properties, a specific index is defined, but not used in record.abs : Subject-name-personal, alias su-na
Other aliases are defined, but as synonyms to Subject index : su-to, su-geo and su-ut.
We can use index Subject-name-personal and create new specific indexes by using existing bib1 attributes.


M. Saby
Comment 2 Mathieu Saby 2013-03-16 21:07:44 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Mathieu Saby 2013-04-03 13:01:13 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 4 I'm just a bot 2013-09-29 05:36:15 UTC
Patch applied cleanly, go forth and signoff
Comment 5 I'm just a bot 2013-10-24 19:37:11 UTC
Applying: Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	C4/Search.pm
M	etc/zebradb/biblios/etc/bib1.att
M	etc/zebradb/ccl.properties
M	etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml
M	etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-zebra-indexdefs.xsl
M	etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/record.abs
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/record.abs
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-zebra-indexdefs.xsl
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/ccl.properties
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in etc/zebradb/ccl.properties
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/biblios/etc/bib1.att
Auto-merging C4/Search.pm
Patch failed at 0001 Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields
The copy of the patch that failed is found in:
   /home/christopher/git/koha/.git/rebase-apply/patch
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
Comment 6 Mathieu Saby 2013-10-24 20:38:41 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 7 Mathieu Saby 2013-10-24 20:59:24 UTC
A followup is probably needed for QueryParser. I don't know how to do that.

Mathieu
Comment 8 I'm just a bot 2013-11-22 22:46:29 UTC
Patch applied cleanly, go forth and signoff
Comment 9 Nick Clemens 2014-08-10 20:46:57 UTC
The sandbox you've requested is not ready.
Some problems occurred applying patches from bug 9828:
<h1>Something went wrong !</h1>Applying: Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging C4/Search.pm
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/biblios/etc/bib1.att
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/ccl.properties
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-zebra-indexdefs.xsl
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/biblio-zebra-indexdefs.xsl
Auto-merging etc/zebradb/marc_defs/unimarc/biblios/record.abs
Failed to merge in the changes.
Patch failed at 0001 Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields
When you have resolved this problem run git bz apply --continue.
If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run git bz apply --skip.
To restore the original branch and stop patching run git bz apply --abort.
Bug 9828 - Zebra indexes useless subfields in UNIMARC 6XX
Comment 10 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-10 21:41:53 UTC
Hello
You cannot test this patch on a sandbox, because you need to rebuild zebra.
If you want to test it, tell me, I will rebase the patch

M. Saby
Comment 11 Nick Clemens 2014-08-10 21:48:33 UTC
Ah, if can't do sandbox I will have to setup a koha instance with UNIMARC, once I have one ready to go I will let you know I am ready for rebase
Comment 12 Nick Clemens 2014-08-16 02:54:25 UTC
I have a UNIMARC instance setup with dom indexing.

I can confirm that before patch:
 - 6XX $2 is indexed
 - su-to, su-geo and su-ut return the same results as su
 - su-na does not return results
 - su-chrono, su-form, su-genre, su-corp, su-conf, su-ti return incorrect results
if any

Happy to test patch in dom if you rebase, I don't have a grs1 setup, but it is now deprecated so maybe is not needed for this patch?
Comment 13 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-18 21:01:33 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 14 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-18 21:02:05 UTC
[New commit on 18 Aug 2014 : rebased, and DOM indexing only]

Issues to fix : 
Most of 6XX may contain a $2 that identifies the system used for indexing. It should not be indexed.
In French libraries, $2 contains "rameau". So searching books about the music composer "Rameau" retreive thousands of records!
For some 6XX fiels, other subfields should not be indexed, for example dates of persons and family, or adresses.
In Unimarc guide, 600$t,601$t,602$t are said to exist but to be "not used". I keep them indexed.

Additionnally, subject indexing could be improved by using specific indexes for each 6XX if possible :
In ccl.properties :
- su-to, su-geo and su-ut are defined as aliases of Subject.
- a specific index is defined, but not used in record.abs : Subject-name-personal, alias su-na
We can use these indexes and create new specific indexes by using existing bib1 attributes.

We could also index $j,$x,$y,$z subdivision in specific indexes.

This patch does the following changes :
1) For all 6XX : Not indexing $2 (LSCH, Rameau...), $3 and $5
2) Suppressing the indexing of some specific subfields, depending on the field:
600 : Personal name used as a subject // see Marc21 600
not indexing c (additional elements),f (dates),p (address/affiliation)
602 : Family name used as a subject // see Marc21 600 3X
not indexing f (dates)
616 : Trademark
not indexing c,f
3) For all 6XX : index $j,$x,$y,$z in several indexes in addition to the specfific index for their 6XX field:
4) Define in ccl.properties some specific indexes :
Subject-name-conference 1=1073 => alias su-conf
Subject-name-corporate 1=1074 => alias su-corp
Subject-genre-form 1=1075 => alias su-genre and su-form
Subject-geographical 1=1076 => alias su-geo
Subject-chronological 1=1077 => alias su-chrono
Subject-title 1=1078 => alias su-ut and su-ti
Subject-topical 1=1079 => alias su-to
5) Adding new aliases in Search.pm :
su-chrono, su-form, su-genre, su-corp, su-conf, su-ti
6) Using these new indexes in for
600 : Subject and Subject-Personal-Name ; all subfields except subdivisions in Personal-name
601 : Subject, Subject-name-conference and Subject-name-corporate and Subject-name-conf ; all subfields except subdivisions in Corporate-name and Conference-name
602 : same as 600 but could be improved later
604 : Subject and Subject-title ; $a in Subject-Personal-Name ; all subfields except subdivisions in Name-and-Title
605 : Subject and Subject-title
606 : Subject and Subject-topical
607 : Subject and Subject-geographical ; all subfields except subdivisions in Name-geographic
608 : Subject and Subject-genre-form

To test :

A. In a UNIMARC-DOM indexing environment
1) Apply the patch
2) Rebuild zebra
3) Create a record A with some values in critical fields, for example:
- the string "test9828" in 600$c 600$f 600$p, 602$f, 616$c, 616$f, 606$2,600$2
- the string "subform" in 600$j
4) Create a record B with the string "subgeo" in 606$y
5) Create a record C with the string "subdate" in 606$z
6) try to search "su:test9828". You should have no results
7) try to search "su-genre:subform". You should have 1 result : record A
8) try to search "su-geo:subgeo". You should have 1 result : record B
9) try to search "su-chrono:subdate". You should have 1 result : record C
10) on existing records, try su-ut, su-to, su-na, su-form, su-corp, su-geo indexes, and see it results are relevant

Indexing of subjects could maybe be improved later
Comment 15 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-18 21:04:41 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 16 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-18 21:06:22 UTC
For testing, I forgot a step : between "apply the patch" and "rebuild zebra", of course you need to copy the modified files from your source directory to the actual zebra configuration directory of your machine. But I suppose you know how to do that.

Mathieu
Comment 17 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-18 21:20:59 UTC
And like Nick suggested, I removed the part of code related to GRS-1, as it is now more or less deprecated. So, please test the patch in a DOM UNIMARC environment.

Mathieu
Comment 18 Nick Clemens 2014-08-19 02:17:39 UTC
Supposing I know how to do things: generally not a good idea :-) I figured it out it pretty quick though
Comment 19 Nick Clemens 2014-08-19 02:32:37 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 20 Nick Clemens 2014-08-19 02:34:23 UTC
Supposing I know how to do things: generally not a good idea :-) I figured it out it pretty quick though
Comment 21 Nick Clemens 2014-08-19 02:36:43 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 22 Nick Clemens 2014-08-19 02:38:05 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 23 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-20 13:01:52 UTC
> 
> All seems to work as expected, I am not super-familiar with UNIMARC but I
> wonder if in su-corp and su-conf the subdivisions might be useful (e.g.
> France-Gendarmie / Staatsbibliothek-Berlin)

For 601 field, the j, x, y, z subfield are mentionned in UNIMARC standard.
See http://multimedia.bnf.fr/unimarcb_trad/B601-6-2013.pdf

The best would be to index separately meetings and organizations, which are both in 601 field, but with different "indicator" value. I'm trying to write a followup for that.

M. Saby
Comment 24 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-20 14:26:14 UTC
I also need to add a followup for Queryparser
Comment 25 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-20 15:25:34 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 26 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-20 15:28:41 UTC
Would you be kind enough to test it again, with the 3rd patch applied on top of the 2 first ones?

You need to test without QP activated : it should work as in your previous test and with QP activated (it should work also).

(Results with QP are sometimes slightly different, I cannot remember why)

M. Saby
Comment 27 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-22 21:45:39 UTC
Note that it is currently impossible to make a more precise indexing of some fields depending on the value stored in the 2 indicators (for field 601 for example). This need an change in  / etc / zebradb / xsl / koha-indexdefs-to-zebra.xsl 

M. Saby
Comment 28 Nick Clemens 2014-08-23 00:36:10 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 29 Mathieu Saby 2014-08-25 06:02:20 UTC
New bug created for indicators:
bug 12813
Comment 30 Paul Poulain 2014-10-09 19:30:33 UTC
QA comments:
 * NOT UNIMARC-specific things:
    - this patch fixes 2 obvious mistakes in bib1.att. It means it also fixes a bug in MARC21 that no-one ever saw :
-att 1075    Subject-genre/form
-att 1076    Subject-name-gerographical
+att 1075    Subject-genre-form
+att 1076    Subject-name-geographical

    - this patch adds the following attributes:
+su-corp Subject-name-corporate
+su-ti Subject-title
=> those 2 additions are harmless, i've checked that there is no reference to that in marc21/normarc directories

no other comment, test plan works.
Comment 31 Paul Poulain 2014-10-09 19:31:42 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 32 Paul Poulain 2014-10-09 19:31:50 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 33 Paul Poulain 2014-10-09 19:32:07 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 34 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-10 09:38:41 UTC
Note:
France -- Gendarmerie is encoded as $aFrance $bGendarmerie
http://multimedia.bnf.fr/unimarcb_trad/B601-6-2013.pdf

M. Saby
Comment 35 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2014-10-22 12:41:28 UTC
Patches don't apply cleanly, please rebase.
Comment 36 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-22 13:15:00 UTC
Of course, because of the new code for facets ;-)
I will rebase this week end.

Mathieu
Comment 37 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2014-10-22 13:44:24 UTC
(In reply to mathieu saby from comment #36)
> Of course, because of the new code for facets ;-)
> I will rebase this week end.

Of course, sorry for that Mathieu. Please feel free to contact me regarding this and the other UNIMARC bug, I'd like to have them pushed soon.
Comment 38 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-25 11:05:17 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 39 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-25 12:17:13 UTC
Created attachment 32725 [details] [review]
[PATCH 1/3] Bug 9828: More specific indexing of UNIMARC 6XX fields
Comment 40 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-25 12:17:53 UTC
Created attachment 32726 [details] [review]
[PATCH 2/3] Bug 9828 : Add and fix comments in UNIMARC biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml
Comment 41 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-25 12:18:32 UTC
Created attachment 32727 [details] [review]
[PATCH 3/3] Bug 9828 : Followup for Queryparser and deletion of useless 6XX$9
Comment 42 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-25 12:21:18 UTC
Rebased
I hope I did not break anything...

I saw an issue in 995$b/c, which are not indexed in the same way in facets and in ordinary index. I will send a message to the french list, as it is not linked with this patch.

Mathieu
Comment 43 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2014-10-27 17:19:47 UTC
Patch pushed to master.

Thanks Mathieu!
Comment 44 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2014-10-28 15:14:15 UTC
Mathieu, I tried to email you but it bounced.

Your patches seem to affect MARC21 (and probably NORMARC) search behaviour. I think it is because you removed:

 Subject 1=21
 su Subject
-su-to Subject

and probably because you only patched the UNIMARC biblio-koha-indexdefs.xml file.

I'm reverting it, but I want it pushed again soon. So, please take a look at the output of this with your patches applied:

prove t/db_dependent/QueryParser.t t/db_dependent/Search.t

to find out.

I think this kind of problem is one of the reasons we need better regression tests, lacking a lot in UNIMARC.
Comment 45 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-28 22:06:01 UTC
I will try to have a look at that. But not obvious, because I don't have a MARC21 install...

Mathieu
Comment 46 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-28 22:50:54 UTC
Could you precise how the MARC21 was affected? No result at all? To much results? Issue with the facets maybe?

I suppressed those 3 aliases
-su-to Subject
-su-geo Subject
-su-ut Subject
But I redefined them later in ccl.properties.
So, MARC21 should not be broken

What I see from MARC21 config file:
- 650 field is indexed in "Subject" index only
- "su-to" is used only for building the facets on 650

So the facets will probably be more precise than before. Is this the behavior you noticed? If so, it is not a bug.



Mathieu
Comment 47 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-28 22:59:06 UTC
By the way, the facet code for unimarc could slighty be improved, but it can be done in an other bug...
Comment 48 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-28 23:31:21 UTC
The test t/Queryparser fails because of a wrong "+    authority-number:"
Comment 49 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-28 23:39:25 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 50 Mathieu Saby 2014-10-28 23:40:40 UTC
I added a followup to silent t/Queryparser

Could you tell me if it is OK, and what is the issue for MARC21 ?

Mathieu
Comment 51 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2014-10-30 03:01:50 UTC
(In reply to mathieu saby from comment #50)
> I added a followup to silent t/Queryparser
> 
> Could you tell me if it is OK, and what is the issue for MARC21 ?

Mathieu, what I noticed is that
 $ prove t/db_dependent/Search.t

was failing with your patches. Will try with the new ones.
Comment 52 Katrin Fischer 2014-10-31 17:28:43 UTC
It would be nice to see this get into 3.18. I can confirm that t/db_dependent/Search.t was failing - hope it can be fixed.
Comment 53 Mathieu Saby 2014-11-02 13:22:46 UTC
Search.t is not failing anymore with my new patches ;-)

Mathieu
Comment 54 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2014-11-19 14:48:47 UTC
I'm failing this one so maybe any MARC21/NORMARC dev can do the changes needed for them.
I'll try to, but not sure i'll have the time.
Comment 55 Mathieu Saby 2014-11-19 15:33:34 UTC
Are you sure there is still a problem? I thought I had fixed it...

Mathieu
Comment 56 Paul Poulain 2014-12-05 14:22:05 UTC
(In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #54)
> I'm failing this one so maybe any MARC21/NORMARC dev can do the changes
> needed for them.
> I'll try to, but not sure i'll have the time.

Tomas,

I don't understand what you mean here. In my comment 30, I pointed that this patch ALSO fixed some MARC21/NORMAC errors, not that it need some work to fix MARC21/NORMAC errors !
So ?
(back to passed QA because this patch is really useful for UNIMARC !)
Comment 57 Mathieu Saby 2014-12-07 00:53:21 UTC
Hello Paul & Tomas

- Paul, since your comment 30 the patch has been changed several times...
- Tomas, see my comment 53, i rewrote the patch, so there should not be any problem in unit tests...

So, in my opinion this patch has been signed off, but need a NEW look by QA, especially to check if UT are broken, and if everything works well with MARC21 install.

So, I think the best status is "Signed off"


Mathieu
Comment 58 Jonathan Druart 2014-12-19 13:28:29 UTC
Created attachment 34537 [details] [review]
Bug 9828 - Delete a duplicate line in queryparser.yaml

the line "authority-number:" was wrongly duplicated
This change should make t/Queryparser.t happy

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
t/Queryparser.t and t/Search.t pass.
Comment 59 Tomás Cohen Arazi 2015-01-27 13:19:47 UTC
I'm sorry, but it does break the tests, still.

What I did was:
- a clean dev install choosing MARC21
- loaded the default DB structure with the default data
- Run
  $ prove t/db_dependent/Search.t
=> BOOM.

I fail it, but plan to help on the MARC21 side as soon as I get back to the office from vacation.
Comment 60 Mathieu Saby 2015-01-28 13:37:58 UTC
(In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #59)
> I'm sorry, but it does break the tests, still.
> 
> What I did was:
> - a clean dev install choosing MARC21
> - loaded the default DB structure with the default data
> - Run
>   $ prove t/db_dependent/Search.t
> => BOOM.
> 
> I fail it, but plan to help on the MARC21 side as soon as I get back to the
> office from vacation.

Sorry for that :/
I don't think I will have to fix that before long.

Mathieu
Comment 61 Martin Renvoize 2020-02-24 16:41:17 UTC
Still relevant?