debian-java-faq seems to be pretty old -

[shirish शिरीष]

Dear all,

I was reading

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/

and it seems the manual is pretty old and seems to have lot of oudated info.

For instance just at the beginning itself -

1.2 Location of this FAQ

This FAQ is published under the Debian Documentation Project at
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/. The java-common
(available at http://packages.debian.org/java-common) provides an HTML
version for offline reading.

this is no longer true -

$ dpkg -L java-common
/.
/usr
/usr/sbin
/usr/sbin/update-java-alternatives
/usr/share
/usr/share/bash-completion
/usr/share/bash-completion/completions
/usr/share/bash-completion/completions/update-java-alternatives
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/doc/java-common
/usr/share/doc/java-common/changelog.gz
/usr/share/doc/java-common/copyright
/usr/share/java
/usr/share/java/java_defaults.mk
/usr/share/man
/usr/share/man/man8
/usr/share/man/man8/update-java-alternatives.8.gz


I don't see any HTML or even SGML files in java-common.

even the subversion repo. is no longer there

https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/manuals/trunk/java-faq/

the link should be -

https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq

then in chapter 2

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch2.en.html

.1 What full-fledged Java development platforms are available in Debian?

shouldn't stretch and jessie (as old-stable) details should be shared herein ?

2.3.1 Java 6 and 7

Shouldn't the whole info. need to be moved to 7 (old-stable) and 8 (stable)

2.4.2 Is there a good example Debian package?

The alioth info. is obsolete, links for the appropriate salsa team
perhaps be more appropriate.

What tools are available to make maintaining a Java packages easier?

Even the debhelper version shared is obsolete. Stable has dh10 and
testing has dh11

Same is for chapter 3

$ update-java-alternatives --list

unfortunately now update-java-alternatives needs sbin

$ update-java-alternatives --list
Command 'update-java-alternatives' is available in
'/usr/sbin/update-java-alternatives'
The command could not be located because '/usr/sbin' is not included
in the PATH environment variable.
This is most likely caused by the lack of administrative priviledges
associated with your user account.
update-java-alternatives: command not found

Same is with chapter 4, all versions shared are outdated.

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch4.en.html

Even chapter 5 needs to update to icedtea-8-plugin and share stretch as stable.

Shouldn't chapter 6 talk about tomcat8

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch6.en.html

Chapter 7 talks about java-policy but there is no such documentation
in java-common

$ dpkg -L java-common
/.
/usr
/usr/sbin
/usr/sbin/update-java-alternatives
/usr/share
/usr/share/bash-completion
/usr/share/bash-completion/completions
/usr/share/bash-completion/completions/update-java-alternatives
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/doc/java-common
/usr/share/doc/java-common/changelog.gz
/usr/share/doc/java-common/copyright
/usr/share/java
/usr/share/java/java_defaults.mk
/usr/share/man
/usr/share/man/man8
/usr/share/man/man8/update-java-alternatives.8.gz

Even the link https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/
seems to have outdated info. it doesn't even seem to have a time-stamp
to denote when it was last touched and written :(

Maybe somebody can do the needful and make it more current so I can
share the documentation with newcomers when somebody asks me .

I am willing to help in my own small way whatever I know off-list if
somebody decides to take this up although the debian-java team may
perhaps be a better guide as they know what is best, although am
willing to share on email as have shared above.

Look forward to seeing java documentation perhaps a bit more up-to-date.

[Markus Koschany]

Hello,

Post by shirish शिरीष
Dear all,
I was reading
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/
and it seems the manual is pretty old and seems to have lot of oudated info.

[...]

We have recently started to improve our Java documentation about
packaging. [1]

I agree that a lot of the information at
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ is outdated. This is
partly because the people who created the old Debian Java FAQ are no
longer involved in Debian Java or may even have reassigned from Debian
completely. It is also more difficult to update the old Debian Java FAQ
instead of updating our Wiki. Hence I suggest the following to you:

If you would like to help us, you could create a new Wiki page, e.g.

https://wiki.debian.org/Java/FAQ

Add those questions and answers to the page that you find interesting
and either update them yourself or mark them as "update needed". Then
let's work together on improving the information.

If your question fits into the packaging section, then you could also
add your question to the Java Packaging FAQ. [2]

Regards,

Markus

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Java/Packaging
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Java/Packaging/FAQ

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Hi there,

Post by Markus Koschany
Hello,

Post by shirish शिरीष
Dear all,
I was reading
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/
and it seems the manual is pretty old and seems to have lot of oudated

info.
[...]

It is mentioned already in the website that some content might be outdated.
However we should probably change that to *is* outdated.

Post by Markus Koschany
I agree that a lot of the information at
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ is outdated.

I agree too as I wrote most of the content a long time ago (18 years!).

This is

Post by Markus Koschany
partly because the people who created the old Debian Java FAQ are no
longer involved in Debian Java or may even have reassigned from Debian
completely.

This is actually because I am not actively updating it myself anymore (last
update I did was 4 years ago) and nobody has stepped in to support the
document. But it would be great if somebody did.

Note that I was never part of the Java team. Just a DD that wanted to
support users in getting help others on how to run Java in their systems by
documenting it.

It is also more difficult to update the old Debian Java FAQ

Post by Markus Koschany
instead of updating our Wiki.

I will not argue much this point, but this is something I do not agree with
too much, specially with the move to Salsa.

There is some advantages to having a good document for end users (e.g.
printable,
easily translatable, off line copy in java-common)

Hence I suggest the following to you:
Why doesn't the Java team actually review the Java FAQ and let DDP know if
it should be kept or dropped completely? (In the latter we should remove it
from the web listing and remove it from java-common).

If kept, the FAQ could have a disclaimer that the document *might* not be
updated and point to the WiKi page for reference (if one exists).

Post by Markus Koschany
If you would like to help us, you could create a new Wiki page, e.g.
https://wiki.debian.org/Java/FAQ
Add those questions and answers to the page that you find interesting
and either update them yourself or mark them as "update needed". Then
let's work together on improving the information.

If this is done please also let DDP know to remove the document and add a
disclaimer in the GIT instead. Otherwise we will end up with contradicting
sources of information which is not very helpful to our users.

Best regards

Javier

[Markus Koschany]

Hi,

Am 31.08.2018 um 19:36 schrieb Javier Fernandez-Sanguino:
[...]

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
I agree too as I wrote most of the content a long time ago (18 years!).
This is
partly because the people who created the old Debian Java FAQ are no
longer involved in Debian Java or may even have reassigned from Debian
completely.
This is actually because I am not actively updating it myself anymore
(last update I did was 4 years ago) and nobody has stepped in to support
the document. But it would be great if somebody did.
Note that I was never part of the Java team. Just a DD that wanted to
support users in getting help others on how to run Java in their systems
by documenting it.

First of all thanks for creating the old Java FAQ!

The other authors were once members of the Java team but they are no
longer active. In my opinion it is crucial that someone does actually
work on Java related projects within Debian, otherwise it becomes
difficult to either ask the right questions or give the right answers.
Java has gone a long way since 18 years ago. Most of the questions are
also of a very basic nature and sources like Wikipedia will already
provide sufficient information for those kind of questions.

At the moment I recommend to mark the current documentation as outdated.
(Big letters and in color) I am even in favor of removing it completely
unless someone steps up to overhaul it now.

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
It is also more difficult to update the old Debian Java FAQ
instead of updating our Wiki.
I will not argue much this point, but this is something I do not agree
with too much, specially with the move to Salsa.
There is some advantages to having a good document for end users
(e.g. printable, easily translatable, off line copy in java-common)

I believe our Wiki is much more accessible for users. They just have to
create an account and can start modifying information. In contrast
working with salsa requires access rights to repositories, and or
reviews of pull requests. I think we want to keep it much simpler
because we are low on contributors anyway. We want to encourage users to
read the current Wiki content and improve that without the need of too
much supervision. I have already worked on improving the Java packaging
section. It makes sense to concentrate all our documentation at one
place now.

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
Why doesn't the Java team actually review the Java FAQ and let DDP know
if it should be kept or dropped completely? (In the latter we should
remove it from the web listing and remove it from java-common).
If kept, the FAQ could have a disclaimer that the document *might* not
be updated and point to the WiKi page for reference (if one exists).
If you would like to help us, you could create a new Wiki page, e.g.
https://wiki.debian.org/Java/FAQ
Add those questions and answers to the page that you find interesting
and either update them yourself or mark them as "update needed". Then
let's work together on improving the information.
If this is done please also let DDP know to remove the document and add
a disclaimer in the GIT instead. Otherwise we will end up with
contradicting sources of information which is not very helpful to our users.

As I said I am in favor of removing the old Java FAQ and I will continue
to work on the Wiki documentation but I only speak for myself.

Regards,

Markus

[shirish शिरीष]

Reply in-line :-

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
Hi there,

Dear all,

<snipped>

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
Why doesn't the Java team actually review the Java FAQ and let DDP know if
it should be kept or dropped completely? (In the latter we should remove it
from the web listing and remove it from java-common).

The content about having both java-faq and having java-policy in
java-common seems to be false as far as
https://packages.debian.org/stretch/all/java-common/filelist is
concerned, it's the same as in Debian-testing as of today.

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
If kept, the FAQ could have a disclaimer that the document *might* not be
updated and point to the WiKi page for reference (if one exists).

Post by Markus Koschany
If you would like to help us, you could create a new Wiki page, e.g.
https://wiki.debian.org/Java/FAQ
Add those questions and answers to the page that you find interesting
and either update them yourself or mark them as "update needed". Then
let's work together on improving the information.

If this is done please also let DDP know to remove the document and add a
disclaimer in the GIT instead. Otherwise we will end up with contradicting
sources of information which is not very helpful to our users.

I am not really an expert in either java or HTML/SGML .

If somebody can make a git repo. of the whole documentation from

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/

I could do a pull and then do a push which would need to be peer-reviewed
from somebody of the debian-java team who can review and correct the content
if needed.

whether or not there should be a copy of the java-faq in java-common I
would best leave to the maintainers although my opinion would be it
would be nice if we can have such content in java-common.

Whenever I and my friends and colleagues do debian installs in
colleges and faraway places, we pride on the fact that debian has its
own inbuilt documentation.

Updating the FAQ is probably a simple job if the HTML/SGML issues
could be worked around as content updation on a text-editor can be
easily done if it's in a git repo.

The Java-debian-policy may be a different fish altogether. If the
above could be done, could do the edits/changes and share it for
peer-review.

Would need the repo. address and any instructions for pushing it to
the repo. for review of the changes I have done.

Post by Javier Fernandez-Sanguino
Best regards
Javier

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Post by shirish शिरीष
1.2 Location of this FAQ
This FAQ is published under the Debian Documentation Project at
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/. The java-common
(available at http://packages.debian.org/java-common) provides an HTML
version for offline reading.
this is no longer true -

I refactored java-common 3 years ago to split the documentation from the
default Java packages. The policy and the FAQ are now in the java-policy
repository:

https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy

Merge requests to update the documentation are welcome :)

Emmanuel Bourg

[shirish शिरीष]

at bottom :-

Post by Emmanuel Bourg

Post by shirish शिरीष
1.2 Location of this FAQ
This FAQ is published under the Debian Documentation Project at
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/. The java-common
(available at http://packages.debian.org/java-common) provides an HTML
version for offline reading.
this is no longer true -

I refactored java-common 3 years ago to split the documentation from the
default Java packages. The policy and the FAQ are now in the java-policy
https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy
Merge requests to update the documentation are welcome :)
Emmanuel Bourg

Dear all,

Thank you Emmanuel for sharing the links.

These are the things I have done at my end -

1. Forked the repo. to my salsa namespace -

https://salsa.debian.org/shirishag75-guest/java-policy

2. Cloned the repo. at my end -

~/games$ git clone https://salsa.debian.org/shirishag75-guest/java-policy
Cloning into 'java-policy'...
warning: redirecting to
https://salsa.debian.org/shirishag75-guest/java-policy.git/
remote: Enumerating objects: 1115, done.
remote: Counting objects: 100% (1115/1115), done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (356/356), done.
remote: Total 1115 (delta 727), reused 1115 (delta 727)
Receiving objects: 100% (1115/1115), 206.11 KiB | 64.00 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (727/727), done.

I am using https://stackoverflow.com/a/32127674/3597669 as my guide.

3. Created a branch at my end -

~/games/java-policy$ git checkout -b faqchanges
Switched to a new branch 'faqchanges'

Now while I'm doing the nominal changes am stuck at certain points -

a. <version>$Revision: 7831 $, $Date: 2013-06-05 21:17:15 +0100 $

how is the revision and time-stamp derived. If I were to guess it would be
something to do with moinmoin ?

b. In 2.2 at https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch2.en.html

gcj and libgcj: http://gcc.gnu.org/java/

Classpath http://www.classpath.org. Most of the Standard classes for
Java 1.2 (except Swing and RMI) are implemented by the ClassPath
project, it tries to build an alternative to jdk's 1.2 core classes.
(NB: This was removed from Squeeze)

Should this content be there anymore ? - guess both can be removed as
nothing of the two projects remain

Even Most free Java development is grouped under the Free Java Project
which links to https://www.gnu.org/software/java/ doesn't have much
except the classpath history .

I was surprised to know that gnu java which at one point was a
high-priority project was deprecated within gcc

https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2014/08/msg00084.html

c. In 2.4.2 I am not sure what links should be put in place of
http://pkg-java.alioth.debian.org/developers.html#rules and
http://pkg-java.alioth.debian.org/building.html

d. For https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch3.en.html
esp. the non-free java would need to pursue the launchpad ppa archive
-

http://www.webupd8.org/2014/03/how-to-install-oracle-java-8-in-debian.html

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch4.en.html

e. 4.5 How can I use the proprietary version of the JDK/JRE from
Oracle as a Debian package?

This probably needs an updated answer, either we give the same link as
above i.e.
http://www.webupd8.org/2014/03/how-to-install-oracle-java-8-in-debian.html
or maybe something else as
http://sylvestre.ledru.info/blog/2012/02/29/java_package_replacement_of_sun_java6
is no longer sufficient :(


I did couple of commits and have put the same as a merge requests at
https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy/merge_requests/1 just
for comparison purposes whether it's good or not.

Quite a few questions of the above need answering before the same can
be considered somewhat done (for now) .

[Osamu Aoki]

Post by shirish शिरीष
at bottom :-

...
...

Post by shirish शिरीष
I did couple of commits and have put the same as a merge requests at
https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy/merge_requests/1 just
for comparison purposes whether it's good or not.
Quite a few questions of the above need answering before the same can
be considered somewhat done (for now) .

I have done XML conversion.

Please consider doing this too.

$ cd faq
$ debiandoc2dbk -1 debian-java-faq.sgml
$ rm debian-java-faq.sgml

Now you have DocBook 4.5

Then you can use the same build set up as the main doc.

Osamu

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino]

Post by Osamu Aoki

Post by shirish शिरीष
at bottom :-

...
...

Post by shirish शिरीष
I did couple of commits and have put the same as a merge requests at
https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy/merge_requests/1 just
for comparison purposes whether it's good or not.
Quite a few questions of the above need answering before the same can
be considered somewhat done (for now) .

I have done XML conversion.
Please consider doing this too.
$ cd faq
$ debiandoc2dbk -1 debian-java-faq.sgml
$ rm debian-java-faq.sgml
Now you have DocBook 4.5
Then you can use the same build set up as the main doc.

The java-policy package should have a copy of the original document (with
no alterations). It should also include a README file to point contributors
to the Salsa repository for the java-faw

Otherwise it will just generate confusion as it will look like we are
managing the same document in two different locations.

Please provide any merge request to the proper repository :
https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq

Note: if someone is git-fluent enough to make this work transparently
please propose how to (i.e commits to java-faq git are pushed/merged into
the java-policy git repo)

Best regards


Javier

[Osamu Aoki]

Hi,

The java-policy package should have a copy of the original document (with no
alterations). It should also include a README file to point contributors to the
Salsa repository for the java-faw

I am a bit confused ...

Otherwise it will just generate confusion as it will look like we are managing
the same document in two different locations.
Please provide any merge request to the proper repository : https://
salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq

I don't know how exactly github merge request needs to be generated ...
But his forked and branched data was good enough for me to work through
classic git command line here and pushed back to master at
https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq

I hope this was OK.

Note: if someone is git-fluent enough to make this work transparently please
propose how to (i.e commits to java-faq git are pushed/merged into the
java-policy git repo)

Normally under github/gitlab like environment, each person fork and use master. If
folk is mergeable, clicking something on web merge request merges them
into https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq

I am not 100% sure ....

[Osamu Aoki]

Hi,

Post by Osamu Aoki
Hi,

...

Post by Osamu Aoki

Note: if someone is git-fluent enough to make this work transparently please
propose how to (i.e commits to java-faq git are pushed/merged into the
java-policy git repo)

Normally under github/gitlab like environment, each person fork and use master. If
folk is mergeable, clicking something on web merge request merges them
into https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/java-faq
I am not 100% sure ....

I found a good reference. You can fork or make branch ... both seems to
work.

See "GitLab Flow"

https://about.gitlab.com/2014/09/29/gitlab-flow/

I still need to digest this.

Osamu

[shirish शिरीष]

at bottom :-

Post by Osamu Aoki

Post by shirish शिरीष
at bottom :-

...
...

Post by shirish शिरीष
I did couple of commits and have put the same as a merge requests at
https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy/merge_requests/1 just
for comparison purposes whether it's good or not.
Quite a few questions of the above need answering before the same can
be considered somewhat done (for now) .

I have done XML conversion.
Please consider doing this too.
$ cd faq
$ debiandoc2dbk -1 debian-java-faq.sgml
$ rm debian-java-faq.sgml
Now you have DocBook 4.5
Then you can use the same build set up as the main doc.
Osamu

Dear Osamu,

I first had to find which package to install in order to get
debiandoc2dbk so installed debiandoc-sgml and the necessary
dependencies on debian testing.

I found the errors and fixed them.

I uploaded it to
https://salsa.debian.org/shirishag75-guest/java-policy/commit/fe0f460895e1d165764e485a178389a566671efd
although didn't see a way to do merge requests.

[shirish शिरीष]

at bottom :-

Package to install is debiandoc-sgml
Sent from iPhone

<snipped>

Dear Osamu,

I already did mate. See
https://salsa.debian.org/shirishag75-guest/java-policy/commits/faqchanges

https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy/merge_requests/5/diffs?commit_id=fe0f460895e1d165764e485a178389a566671efd

Btw, I closed down the earlier merge request and made a new one, see
https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/java-policy/merge_requests/5/commits

and then realized had forgotten to remove the earlier revision
date/time-stamp which I did.

Please go through the latest revised debian-java-faq.dbk and let me
know if any more changes are required or got left over .

[Osamu Aoki]

Hi,

Post by shirish शिरीष
at bottom :-

...

Post by shirish शिरीष
and then realized had forgotten to remove the earlier revision
date/time-stamp which I did.

That's true for policy. I think we should keep such information so I
added it back in the safe way.

Post by shirish शिरीष
Please go through the latest revised debian-java-faq.dbk and let me
know if any more changes are required or got left over .

Well I fixed typos etc. and updated build script. dsssl is too old.

Anyway, VCS-git was totally outdated. So I uploaded with new URL after
making package buildable.

I don't know which bug to be closed. So please follow up fixing
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?repeatmerged=no&src=java-policy
(Which patches are applied and close)

Now you can focus on the content.

With some care we can build PDF or add PO for translation. But I
strongly suggest to work on the content first. When you document moving
target things, please organize content for easy update.

Regards,

Osamu

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Post by shirish शिरीष
Now while I'm doing the nominal changes am stuck at certain points -
a. <version>$Revision: 7831 $, $Date: 2013-06-05 21:17:15 +0100 $
how is the revision and time-stamp derived. If I were to guess it would be
something to do with moinmoin ?

This is a keyword expansion, a feature of CVS and SVN that Git doesn't
support. With these VCS if a file contained $Revision$ it was expanded
to $Revision: 1234 $ when the file was checked out. Let's ignore that
for now and focus on the content.

Post by shirish शिरीष
b. In 2.2 at https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch2.en.html
gcj and libgcj: http://gcc.gnu.org/java/
Classpath http://www.classpath.org. Most of the Standard classes for
Java 1.2 (except Swing and RMI) are implemented by the ClassPath
project, it tries to build an alternative to jdk's 1.2 core classes.
(NB: This was removed from Squeeze)
Should this content be there anymore ? - guess both can be removed as
nothing of the two projects remain

All references to GCJ/GIJ/GNU ClassPath should be removed, this is just
History now.

Post by shirish शिरीष
I was surprised to know that gnu java which at one point was a
high-priority project was deprecated within gcc

When Sun released Java under the GPL and started the OpenJDK project it
lost its raison d'être.

Post by shirish शिरीष
c. In 2.4.2 I am not sure what links should be put in place of
http://pkg-java.alioth.debian.org/developers.html#rules and
http://pkg-java.alioth.debian.org/building.html

http://pkg-java.alioth.debian.org now maps to https://java.debian.net.

Post by shirish शिरीष
d. For https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch3.en.html
esp. the non-free java would need to pursue the launchpad ppa archive

Chapter 3 is about update-java-alternatives. How does it relate to the PPA?

Post by shirish शिरीष
e. 4.5 How can I use the proprietary version of the JDK/JRE from
Oracle as a Debian package?
This probably needs an updated answer, either we give the same link as
above i.e.
http://www.webupd8.org/2014/03/how-to-install-oracle-java-8-in-debian.html
or maybe something else as
http://sylvestre.ledru.info/blog/2012/02/29/java_package_replacement_of_sun_java6
is no longer sufficient :(

java-package is the supported solution for now. I wish we could also
include in non-free an installer similar to webupd8.org.

Emmanuel Bourg

[Thorsten Glaser]

Post by Emmanuel Bourg

Post by shirish शिरीष
I was surprised to know that gnu java which at one point was a
high-priority project was deprecated within gcc

=20
When Sun released Java under the GPL and started the OpenJDK project it
lost its raison d'=C3=AAtre.

One of them.

GCJ is more portable and can create native executables for
many Java=E2=84=A2 programs (though not those doing classloader
magic at runtime, for example)=E2=80=8A=E2=80=94=E2=80=8Athese two reasons =
are still
extant, although I have heard GCJ no longer is :|

bye,
//mirabilos
--=20
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstra=C3=9Fe 2-4, D-53123 Bonn =E2=80=A2 http://www.tarent.de/
Tel: [phone] =E2=80=A2 Fax: [phone]
HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) =E2=80=A2 USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Gesch=C3=A4ftsf=C3=BChrer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Ale=
xander Steeg

*************************************************

**Besuchen Sie uns auf der dmexco 2018!**

12**.=C2=A0**& 13. September 2018, Koelnmesse / **Halle 7,** **Stand A-031*=
*

Digital Business, Marketing und Innovation

[www.tarent.de/dmexco](http://www.tarent.de/dmexco)

*************************************************

**Visit us at dmexco 2018!**

12th & 13th September, 2018, Koelnmesse / **Hall 7,** **Booth A-031**

Digital business, marketing and innovation

[www.tarent.de/dmexco](http://www.tarent.de/dmexco)

*************************************************