Hello,

I hope this group message of mine finds the reader in good health and
mood. I'm Anitha and this being my first post, I'll keep it short. You
can find the complete Computers and Internet directory here
http://www.hi-fiweb.com/directories/computing/ .

Take care,

Himani

--- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "himani_post3" <himani_post3@y...>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
[ SPAM ]
>
> Take care,
>
> Himani

This spam is from a member who joined ONE DAY before posting it.
Please, whoever is in charge of the group, turn membership to MODERATED.

Thanks, ---J

Bored? Want to meet someone new? Chat with Real Women in YOUR AREA

1-800-335-9396

Only $0.99 min with a major credit card. NO CONNECT FEES!

No credit card? No problem! Just call

1-206-576-1791!

Only $0.99 min with a $4.99 connect fee. Billed discreetly as a collect  call on
your phone bill.

Hey I just wanted to tell you about a great company I found!
I applyed for a lower mortgage rate and i only had to
fill in a simple form. This month alone I saved $500 dollars!
check out their site http://www.greatrefi.com/?a=candi
I hope it helps you as much as it did for me!

Take advantage of better interest rates, refinance now just like I did, it will
save you lots of money each month. This service can help. 
http://tpbaj.com/i/LzQvaW5kZXgvd2F6ZWUvdTZidHQzaWN0cWs5MWt4 take 30 seconds and
fill out this free form

--- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, bwross@c... wrote:
> Daniel Ligon <maglorn@c...> wrote:
> // On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 01:02:45AM -0400, bwross@c... wrote:
> // >
> // > That's my fault, and so I'll say I'm sorry.  I should have
branched early on
> // > and kept a running patch release line going.
> //
> // Don't sweat it.  The key is to get back on the right track.
>
> Just a short little report to say I'm still ploughing ahead
aggressively
> trying to get to a reasonable alpha.  Today I've already fixed a number
> of very annoying bugs (one in particular was giving monsters infinite
> attacks) and sorted out a number of things about melee in general.

... and 45 days later?

// --- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, bwross@c... wrote:
// > Daniel Ligon <maglorn@c...> wrote:
// > // On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 01:02:45AM -0400, bwross@c... wrote:
// > // >
// > // > That's my fault, and so I'll say I'm sorry.  I should have
// branched early on
// > // > and kept a running patch release line going.
// > //
// > // Don't sweat it.  The key is to get back on the right track.
// >
// > Just a short little report to say I'm still ploughing ahead
// aggressively
// > trying to get to a reasonable alpha.  Today I've already fixed a number
// > of very annoying bugs (one in particular was giving monsters infinite
// > attacks) and sorted out a number of things about melee in general.
//
// ... and 45 days later?

Demonspawn appear to be getting conflicting mutations (breate fire and throw
fire, torment and torment resist (which naturally prevents the torment)).  The
beam code has shown a few more problems... still some cases of double hits or
(in the case of poison blast) no hit.  Yesterday it asserted within seconds on
a test run.  I am working on it every day, and only fixing things, but I'm
still finding serious problems (some of which existed since 26 or before).

Brent

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 bwross@... wrote:

> // ... and 45 days later?
>
> I am working on it every day, and only fixing things, but I'm still
> finding serious problems (some of which existed since 26 or before).

This may be an inappropriate time to ask again "Why not?" but, oh well.

What exactly is the reason why development should be closeted off? I
don't see the downside to providing a read-only (at the least) source
repository that people can track, so others can see what's going on,
and so that future developers have some lead time in familiarizing
themselves with the codebase. Someone may also be able to assist you
in isolating the core of these issues.

As long as things are closeted, though, none of that can happen. If
Crawl has become a one-man show, I'd rather that just be declared,
because things have reached the point where even past developers
(unless in receipt of uncirculated code) will have to struggle uphill
in places to catch up whenever something finally materializes.

I guess I still don't grasp why all this work is being done in the dark.

-don

In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "d.brodale" <yahoo@b...> wrote:

> I guess I still don't grasp why all this work
> is being done in the dark.

Looks like no one else grasps it, either.

  ---J

Hello!
I found a updated directory on Computing & Internet resources/news in
Targeted News.
URL : http://targetednews.info/news/
Cheers!
Kathy

I refinanced my home at an incredible interest rate, I now save over 6000.00 a
year on my home loan payments. Check this service out. 
http://tpbaj.com/i/LzIvaW5kZXgvd2F6ZWUvMXIxcDdhNGF1djNjZjZyYTJv take 30 seconds
and fill out this free form to save money

--- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "d.brodale" <yahoo@b...> wrote:
> What exactly is the reason why development should be closeted off?

It shouldn't.  I agree.

Therefore, since the Crawl license permits it, I'm going to fork the beta 26
codebase into a
new project.

The project's name is to be determined, as are its scope and features.  My
instinct is to
declare that the first release will focus entirely on bugfixes from beta 26, new
feature work
only to be decided on later.  The project will be in source control and
read-only access will
be available to the world, read/write access will be available to trusted
developers.  The
bar to becoming a 'trusted developer' will be pretty low.

If you are interested in participating, please send mail to "crawl -at- tgr
_dot_ com" and
indicate your interest level.  At the present time, please ONLY volunteer if you
are a
software developer.  If you just have a lot of cool ideas for the next version,
then I'd say
keep it in this Yahoo group instead.  In your mail, please specifically mention
the
following:

(1) whether you know how to use some source control system (cvs, svn, perforce)
(2) to what extent you've looked at the Crawl source code, and to what extent.
(3) what fixes, if any, have you made to crawl beta 26 that haven't yet hit any
release (feel
free to attach context diffs if you like)
(4) what platforms you primarily intend to develop for.
(5) How much time a month you can devote to the project.

Let me be perfectly frank:  I _don't_ have a metric buttload of time to devote
to an open
source project.  But I am willing to get this set up and rolling and spend a few
hours a
week integrating patches, fixing bugs, and rolling releases, at least until
someone else can
take over.  The current state of Dungeon Crawl (utterly moribund) isn't really
good enough
to keep it alive.

-peterb

--- pgbalb <pgbalb@...> wrote:

> --- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "d.brodale" <yahoo@b...> wrote:
> > What exactly is the reason why development should be closeted off?
>
> It shouldn't.  I agree.
>
> Therefore, since the Crawl license permits it, I'm going to fork the
> beta 26 codebase into a
> new project.
>
> The project's name is to be determined, as are its scope and features.
> My instinct is to
> declare that the first release will focus entirely on bugfixes from beta
> 26, new feature work
> only to be decided on later.  The project will be in source control and
> read-only access will
> be available to the world, read/write access will be available to
> trusted developers.  The
> bar to becoming a 'trusted developer' will be pretty low.
>
> If you are interested in participating, please send mail to "crawl -at-
> tgr _dot_ com" and
> indicate your interest level.  At the present time, please ONLY
> volunteer if you are a
> software developer.  If you just have a lot of cool ideas for the next
> version, then I'd say
> keep it in this Yahoo group instead.  In your mail, please specifically
> mention the
> following:
>
> (1) whether you know how to use some source control system (cvs, svn,
> perforce)

I've used all three (although subversion only briefly).

> (2) to what extent you've looked at the Crawl source code, and to what
> extent.

I've flipped through most of it very briefly and looked at several areas
in some depth.

> (3) what fixes, if any, have you made to crawl beta 26 that haven't yet
> hit any release (feel
> free to attach context diffs if you like)

none so far... there really hasn't been any open feeling to the whole
thing.

> (4) what platforms you primarily intend to develop for.

windows.

> (5) How much time a month you can devote to the project.

i dunno... depends on how interesting things look. I've been interested in
the game for a long time - and I'm most interested in seeing it move. If
someone were to give me specific directions for work to do that would
probably give me more motivation.




--
We have tamed lightning and now use it to make sand think.
Jeff Bay (469) 867-0370 jlb0170@...
Resume: http://www.xpteam.com/jeff

I'd like to help, too. My experiences have been with CVS and
Subverison -- never used Perforce, but heard nice things about their
stuff.

  ---J

// On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 bwross@... wrote:
//
// > // ... and 45 days later?
// >
// > I am working on it every day, and only fixing things, but I'm still
// > finding serious problems (some of which existed since 26 or before).
//
// This may be an inappropriate time to ask again "Why not?" but, oh well.
//
// What exactly is the reason why development should be closeted off? I
// don't see the downside to providing a read-only (at the least) source
// repository that people can track, so others can see what's going on,
// and so that future developers have some lead time in familiarizing
// themselves with the codebase. Someone may also be able to assist you
// in isolating the core of these issues.

You're right.   It really shouldn't... I'm pretty sure I've actually doing some
damage with my haste at times now.  The thing is that when I asked back then
there was only a luke warm response, so I just kept plowing away every day
picking a bug or incomplete system and fixing it.  But it looks like people are
finally speaking up and willing to do things.  If that's the case they should
be speaking up more here on the list as to what they want to do.

Brent Ross

// I'd like to help, too. My experiences have been with CVS and
// Subverison -- never used Perforce, but heard nice things about their
// stuff.

Perforce is nice (I have used it), but if I remember correctly the free
version has limitations (only 2 clients IIRC).

Brent Ross

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, pgbalb wrote:

> Therefore, since the Crawl license permits it, I'm going to fork the
> beta 26 codebase into a new project.

See my comments below.


> The project's name is to be determined, as are its scope and features.
> My instinct is to declare that the first release will focus entirely on
> bugfixes from beta 26, new feature work only to be decided on later.
> The project will be in source control and read-only access will be
> available to the world, read/write access will be available to trusted
> developers.  The bar to becoming a 'trusted developer' will be pretty
> low.

This is mostly valid, but I have two concerns:

(1) Loss of whatever unseen progress Brent has made.
(2) Setting the bar too low.

Honestly, if a repository is made world-readable, there's no reason to set
the bar low at all for one to become a "trusted developer" -- any outside
parties can always submit patches/diffs against the public repository, and
based on the patches supplied, can be drawn into the "trusted" group over
time by those already in.

Note that I'm not saying who should already be in the "trusted" camp, but
clearly there needs to be at least one person who's willing to look at
patch submissions, evaluate them critically, and act on them (by merging
them into the tree and/or asking persistent contributors to join the
current lineup) in a timely fashion.

Emphasis on the "timely" modifier.

As for my suggestion for choice of SCM, I'd avoid Perforce. All the cool
kids would love to use something like darcs, but to be honest, the choice
should come down to subversion or cvs. I've used both rather extensively
in my regular job(s), and of the two, I'd say that subversion has mostly
progressed to a point where it should be favored over cvs.

Keeping to subversion would also allow direct import of Brent's work
(should it become available) as part of a subversion repository ... heck,
it would even be worth it (in my opinion, of course) to take what is
available of Crawl's past source and stick it all into svn as a series of
branches of a moving trunk ... I've done this with a personal project to
renovate LinuxRogue and have found it useful at times to see where things
went by the wayside, though in the case of Crawl, it may be of mostly
historical interest given the large gaps between releases and the lack of
step-wise commits in between those gaps. Anyway...


> Let me be perfectly frank:  I _don't_ have a metric buttload of time to
> devote to an open source project.  But I am willing to get this set up
> and rolling and spend a few hours a week integrating patches, fixing
> bugs, and rolling releases, at least until someone else can take over.
> The current state of Dungeon Crawl (utterly moribund) isn't really good
> enough to keep it alive.

Here, I would have to agree that the state of Crawl is rapidly approaching
a position that is untenable as a "living" roguelike. Well, perhaps in all
honesty, absent Brent's work and a concerted effort to bring his changes
into the light (and have them be understood by more than one person), the
point of no return might already have been reached.

[[ Aside to Brent: In response to your comment of past lukewarm response,
    I believe it stems largely from a sense that it wouldn't have mattered
    to have jumped up and down about the source in the past ... from what
    I do recall, there were times where some past developers did just that
    to no favorable net gain. The sign for which you were waiting eludes
    my understanding, to be sure. ]]

As for branching the codebase, as you state, there's nothing preventing
this from happening. I've said that myself several times in the past. I
may, however, temper this view with a personal belief: the declaration of
a fork is meaningless unless something is actively underway. When I had
hinted that "hey, someone could always fork Crawl" in the past, I may have
been too subtle in stating what I honestly felt ... which was someone
would actually have to do some private struggling first to then offer up a
tangible project starter worthy of being called a fork rather than to say
"fork this!" and then expect useful results immediately to accrete.

But that's just me. There are already at least four "forks" of Crawl in
current existence, and a couple more that were and no longer really are,
and with the exception of Darshan's patchwork and the tile-based graphic
overlay, I don't believe any have garnered much success in terms of user
base or developer support.

Then again, I could be wrong in that estimation, as I track Crawl's lack
of forward progress rather lazily these days.

However, my two cents: Brent, it would be much appreciated if you'd join
an effort to rejuvenate Crawl, or at least afford an opportunity for its
collaborative rebirth, by making your changes accessible to other people.

Even if you want to keep on truckin' with what you have, it would be nice
to provide some sort of "leg up" to others who might not want to recreate
or re-examine all that you've done in the past two years.

A rant, I know, but c'mon, this whole situation is getting to be rather
silly, what with the requests to see something on the one hand and the
notion to start anew from where things were two years ago absent solid
preliminary work to justify the desire to give up on Brent altogether,
no matter how tempting that may appear at times.

But perhaps, if one forks it, they will come. Or something.

-don

I've queued up a creation request in Sourceforge for a project tentatively named
"Dungeon
Crawl Reference".  Approval should happen sometime midweek.

-peterb

--- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "d.brodale" <yahoo@b...> wrote:
> the declaration of a fork is meaningless unless something is actively
underway.

But that's my entire point.  Over the past year I (and many others) have been
actively fixing
the Crawl codebase, but have no way to get those patches in to the codebase.  We
send diffs
to the list, or ask where to submit patches (witness the title of the thread),
but it's a black
hole.  I mean, Crawl won't even _compile_ with a modern GCC on OSX any more
without
patches.

So maybe Brent's doing great work.  I have no idea.  He will be welcome to
contribute to
Dungeon Crawl Reference, like all other contributors, as long as he doesn't
break the build.
And that way we'll get the benefit of Brent's work, _as well as_ the work of all
the other
wonderful people who really want to contribute to Crawl, but so far have been
prevented
from doing so.

Hope that clarifies my position a bit.

Great ; so it sounds like a number of people are willing to contribute.

I'll be setting up the repository sometime later this week.

d.brodale:  I appreciate and understand your comments, but I think you're
misunderstanding the situation vis-a-vis the purpose of the fork.  I'm forking
the
codebase not because I -want- to do some work on crawl, but because I (and other
people, as indicated by the title of the previous thread) _have already done
work on crawl_
but couldn't manage to get even the simplest patches (like "allow this to build
if you're
using a compiler less than 2 years old") integrated into the source tree.

Brent may have done great work.  I have no idea.  But it's not OK for him to
hold back
other people's ability to contribute while meditates on it.  Thus, forking.

The funny thing is this could be avoided trivially by Brent just granting commit
access to
the people who are trying, desperately, to contribute to the project.  But it
sounds to me
like he still doesn't understand why that's necessary.

hope that clarifies my position.

peterb

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, pgbalb wrote:

> I've queued up a creation request in Sourceforge for a project
> tentatively named "Dungeon Crawl Reference".

Might I ask what the intended meaning of "Reference" is in the above
title? It's not immediately apparent to me.

Read strictly, the licensing of Linley's Dungeon Crawl seems to render
it incompatible with the requirements of SourceForge (i.e., it is neither
OSI-approved nor does it meet all the requirements of OSI's Open Source
Definition). I may be reading OSTG's Project Hosting Guidelines too
closely, though.


> I mean, Crawl won't even _compile_ with a modern GCC on OSX any more
> without patches.

Why it doesn't borders on the trivial. This is not to say this isn't a
shortcoming that ought to be remedied, but don't form a strawman from it.


> d.brodale:  I appreciate and understand your comments, but I think
> you're misunderstanding the situation vis-a-vis the purpose of the fork.
> I'm forking the codebase not because I -want- to do some work on crawl,
> but because I (and other people, as indicated by the title of the
> previous thread) _have already done work on crawl_ but couldn't manage
> to get even the simplest patches (like "allow this to build if you're
> using a compiler less than 2 years old") integrated into the source
> tree.

I don't believe I've misunderstood the situation. On the other hand, I was
prompted to write about reservations I have about what I see as something
of an incompletely formed notion about what the "fork" will accomplish
beyond assemblage of a handful of pre-existing patches. Not to belittle
any work that has been done (of which I have no intention), but a small
number of limited patches does not a fork make (yet).

As I said earlier, maybe something will happen, maybe something won't,
but I haven't really seen any direction beyond gathering in those few
patches and waiting to see what happens next.


-don

On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 04:59:37PM -0400, d.brodale wrote:
>
> > I mean, Crawl won't even _compile_ with a modern GCC on OSX any more
> > without patches.
>
> Why it doesn't borders on the trivial. This is not to say this isn't a
> shortcoming that ought to be remedied, but don't form a strawman from it.

That doesn't strike me as a strawman.  Neither does it, in itself,
strike me as a reason to *fork*.  It strikes me as a reason for
someone to get off their duff and do something about it.  The problems
may well border on the trivial, but many people lack the time,
patience, or technical knowledge to do it.  (In my case, it's the
time.)  It's ridiculous to expect everyone on newer OSX systems to do
this work, so *someone* should distribute a fixed version.  If those
in charge of the mainline distribution won't do it, that calls for
either a more open process, or a fork (even if it is a minor one).
Likewise on the other patches, if there is demand enough for them to
be distributed.

And so, it's a race.  Thich will happen first?  Will the mainline
developers open the process, or at least release fixes to relieve the
discontent of those on the outside, or will those on the outside get
fed up and fork?  Looks to me like the fork is winning.

-Jesse

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Jesse Welton wrote:

> > > I mean, Crawl won't even _compile_ with a modern GCC on OSX any more
> > > without patches.
> >
> > Why it doesn't borders on the trivial. This is not to say this isn't a
> > shortcoming that ought to be remedied, but don't form a strawman from it.
>
> That doesn't strike me as a strawman.  Neither does it, in itself,
> strike me as a reason to *fork*.  It strikes me as a reason for someone
> to get off their duff and do something about it.

I mostly agree. But, I also think the comment an attempt in the original
post to exaggerate the state of the codebase relative to OS X.


> It's ridiculous to expect everyone on newer OSX systems to do this work,
> so *someone* should distribute a fixed version.  If those in charge of
> the mainline distribution won't do it, that calls for either a more open
> process, or a fork (even if it is a minor one). Likewise on the other
> patches, if there is demand enough for them to be distributed.

For OS X users, ignoring those who can grok the output of gcc and fix
things in the absence of a patch, I see the benefit curve in increasing
order as follows:

(1) Supply a patch in a more visible forum against the source tree.
     [Still requires knowledge of gcc, but I should probably do at
      least this and post it to dungeoncrawl.org this week.]

(2) Patch and provide a true OS X commandline binary.
     [Now things are just a download. Still offer patch, though.]

(3) Provide a package to DarwinPorts and/or Fink.
     [Adds unnecessary dependency on a packaging system, but
      no longer requires direct knowledge of gcc. Offers benefit
      of managed future upgrade path.]

(4) Patch and provide an OS X Crawl.app.
     [Involving a minimal wrapper script in the bundle to launch
      the commandline binary, but at least crawl would be bundled.
      Might as well make it a true pretty .dmg as well.]

(5) Patch, then keep patching to bring crawl into harmony with
     Xcode to provide (4) and more.
     [Nirvana?]

Clearly, we're at (0). Perhaps I'm understimating the potential
OS X audience, but what's really needed in the end is something
around (4) at the least. I would guess that (2) would suffice.


> And so, it's a race.  Thich will happen first?  Will the mainline
> developers open the process, or at least release fixes to relieve the
> discontent of those on the outside, or will those on the outside get fed
> up and fork?  Looks to me like the fork is winning.

Two corrections:

(1) There are no mainline developers (plural), there's just Brent.
(2) It's not a race.

-don

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Aaron Golden wrote:

> A few months ago I posted an OS X binary for beta 26.  It should still
> be sitting around in the group's files section.  I don't think it was
> ever given a link on dungeoncrawl.org's download page.

Nope. I can confirm that it wasn't. My fault. I reviewed the patch,
but never posted anything.

-don

--- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "d.brodale" <yahoo@b...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, pgbalb wrote:
>
> > I've queued up a creation request in Sourceforge for a project
> > tentatively named "Dungeon Crawl Reference".
>
> Might I ask what the intended meaning of "Reference" is in the above
> title? It's not immediately apparent to me.

The intent is to create a reference platform off of which people who want to
work on DC or
its variants may use with high confidence that their patches will integrate
smoothly into
the main line.

> Read strictly, the licensing of Linley's Dungeon Crawl seems to render
> it incompatible with the requirements of SourceForge (i.e., it is neither
> OSI-approved nor does it meet all the requirements of OSI's Open Source
> Definition). I may be reading OSTG's Project Hosting Guidelines too
> closely, though.

It's not actually our problem.  Sourceforge provides the ability for us to
specify the license
to be used; that's what I did.  They're always free to reject it, in which case
we'll host
somewhere else.  Since the Crawl license is basically identical to the Nethack
license, and
the Nethack license is one of Sourceforge's acceptable license, I'm not too
concerned.


> > I mean, Crawl won't even _compile_ with a modern GCC on OSX any more
> > without patches.
>
> Why it doesn't borders on the trivial. This is not to say this isn't a
> shortcoming that ought to be remedied, but don't form a strawman from it.

My meta-point is that if, after a whole year of people trying desperately to
submit even the
most trivial diffs, the latest sources don't compile on a mainstream OS,
something is
seriously broken with the development process.   That's what I intend to fix.

thanks,

peterb

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, pgbalb wrote:

> Since the Crawl license is basically identical to the Nethack license,
> and the Nethack license is one of Sourceforge's acceptable license, I'm
> not too concerned.

That's actually untrue. Crawl's license is near-identical to NetHack's
prior license. It is the current NetHack license that is OSI-approved,
and therefore a match for SourceForge's listed licensing requirements.

The NetHack team changed licensing for 3.3.0 and all later releases.
Linley copied and modified the NetHack GPL prior to that alteration.

-don

On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 03:47:40PM -0700, Aaron Golden wrote:
> A few months ago I posted an OS X binary for beta 26.  It should
> still be sitting around in the group's files section.  I don't think
> it was ever given a link on dungeoncrawl.org's download page.

Ah, yes.  Thanks.  I must have missed that.  I see there are a couple
of problems with this buid.  The major one is that the colors don't
come out right.  In particular, anything that should be dark grey
comes out black, and is invisible.  That includes all the map which is
not currently visible, spells in books which have not yet been
memorized, and other common things you'd really rather see.  (Perhaps
there's a configuration change I can make to the terminal colors that
would fix it, but if so I couldn't find it.)

Another one is that shift+numpad doesn't work to run.  This seems to
be a feature change from when last I played much Crawl (3.3 on OS9),
rather than just an oversight.  I note that numpad 5 gives a long
rest, like shift+numpad 5 used to, and does nothing in the presence of
monsters.  The inability to use the numpad to either run or wait for
monsters to come to you is a sad loss from the UI.

-Jesse

--- In crawl-dev@yahoogroups.com, "d.brodale" <yahoo@b...> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, pgbalb wrote:
>
> > Since the Crawl license is basically identical to the Nethack license,
> > and the Nethack license is one of Sourceforge's acceptable license, I'm
> > not too concerned.
>
> That's actually untrue. Crawl's license is near-identical to NetHack's
> prior license. It is the current NetHack license that is OSI-approved,
> and therefore a match for SourceForge's listed licensing requirements.

Well, as I said:  SourceForge is free to reject it, and if they do, we'll simply
host
it somewhere else.  It's not like having a CVS server and a web page is an
insurmountable obstacle.  On the other hand, if they accept it,
no problem.

-peterb

Act now on the lowest interest rates ever. Never can you save more on your home
loan then right now. Save money the easy way, refinance your home now. .
http://qiwuz.com/i/LzUvaW5kZXgvd2F6ZWUveGF0ODQ3dXZwMWdmaTFhcTYz take 30 seconds
and fill out this free form to save money