[01:49] hi, i packaged the fonts of the android mobile platform, could someone review them? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=ttf-droid === hyperair1 is now known as hyperair [02:31] Laney: are you about? === jono_ is now known as jono [03:03] darn, aptitude 0.5.0 didn't make it with its fancy aptitude-gtk gui in ubuntu :\ [03:05] savvas, Should it have? [03:06] persia: I don't have anything to back it up except for the wish to try it out - so probably no :) [03:06] savvas, Try it out in a PPA. If you come up with a convincing reason, it could be a candidate. [03:06] That said, it's fairly core, so time is of the essence. [03:07] you're right, I'll do that! [03:14] persia: come to think of it, it should wait for another release and a proper review - there's a dependency on apt-xapian-index package that looks quite interesting [03:17] I'll give it a go in my ppa though, maybe I'll find something radical :) [03:18] savvas, Good catch. We'll certainly catch it for autosync for jaunty+1. [03:31] microsoft sure is creative... oh wait I have seen this model before: http://news.zdnet.com/2424-9595_22-256995.html === Jazzva_ is now known as Jazzva === hyperair1 is now known as hyperair [05:08] * ScottK runs python3.0 for the first time. === emgent_ is now known as emgent [05:50] Hi, I've used requestsync to request a sync for icu4j package (bug #314615), and Package Archive admin has been directly subscribed, without the sponsorship step. [05:50] Launchpad bug 314615 in icu4j "Please sync icu4j 3.8.1-1 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)." [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/314615 [05:51] Is there a problem? (the -s flag doesn't work in requestsync) [05:52] fabrice_sp, There've been a few bugs reported against requestsync. You might try tweaking the code to point at staging.launchpad.net, and fiddle a bit to determine if you've found one. [05:53] ok persia. And about the bug? Will P-A-a reject the request as no sponsorship has been done? [05:54] Or ignore it. I'd recommend subscribing the sponsors now. [05:54] ok [05:54] thanks [06:19] thanks for the ack, persia ;-) [06:19] G'morning. [06:19] (and there is a bug in the launchpad interface, as according to syncrequest, I am a member of ubuntu-dev) :-S [06:20] Morning iulian [06:20] Hiya fabrice_sp. === emgent_ is now known as emgent [06:46] hi all, just wondering if someone could point me to some Ubuntu ruby policy, I've read Debian's policy and can't seem to find Ubuntu's [06:46] good morning [06:47] binarymutant, In practice, they are identical. [06:48] thanks persia :) [06:48] binarymutant, I don't know much about Ruby, but generally, unless Ubuntu has documented doing something differently, you can assume that Debian's stuff applies to Ubuntu as well [06:48] okay thats what I thought, just making sure thanks :) [06:57] good morning dholbach [06:58] hiya fabrice_sp [07:05] good morning o/ [07:06] hi didrocks [07:16] hi dholbach :) [07:52] <_ruben> this probably not the best place to ask but dont know any better place .. when i use debmirror to create a local mirror, why do some packages get deleted when there's a new version available, and others do not (keeping old versions around which could come in handy) [08:06] _ruben, do you have more than one release ("distro") in the mirror? if so, the old versions might be in those [08:07] <_ruben> liw: true, but the downloaded list output by debmirror tends to be a fair bit larger than the deleted list === hyperair1 is now known as hyperair [08:16] <\sh> moins and happy new year :) [08:38] hi \sh! happy new year to you too [09:47] good morning, i packaged the fonts of the android mobile platform, could someone review them? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=ttf-droid === Skiessio is now known as Skiessi [10:05] vorian: hi === asac_ is now known as asac === thekorn_ is now known as thekorn === jcfp is now known as Guest38683 === Guest38683 is now known as jcfp === nhandler_ is now known as nhandler === ember_ is now known as ember [13:20] calc: I was trying to analyze the build failure for jaxme. What I am not able to understand is that the function names mentioned in the error don't even exist anywhere. [13:56] Laney: I was just trying to catch you on irc before i responed to your reportbug bug [13:57] vorian: Oh ok, I'll post a thread [13:58] we should still update to the new version whatever happens, as the default (bugs.debian.org) SMTP server is broken apparently [13:58] Laney: There isn't a good default we can put there. [13:59] Why can't we use Debian's default? [13:59] reportbug.debian.org [13:59] Oh. Actually that might work. [13:59] Historically the problem has been that any generic mail server you put in there would need to be an open relay. [13:59] the point is that Debian recently changed their default and we still have the old one [14:00] OK. [14:00] but I accidently started a discussion which now blocks my upload :( [14:00] What bug are we discussing? [14:00] bug 314556 [14:00] Launchpad bug 314556 in reportbug "Please merge reportbug 3.48 from Debian unstable (main)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/314556 [14:00] see Don Armstrong's change [14:05] I feel some would have strong feelings both ways [14:05] (that's too much use of feel) [14:07] is the server used by requestsync an open relay? [14:08] I would hope not... [14:08] does anyone know how the RELEASE.gpg file is made [14:08] it looks like a detached clearsigned signature [14:08] ive tried making my own for sha1s but... i havn't been able to [14:08] 288 # get server address [14:08] 289 mailserver = os.getenv('DEBSMTP') [14:08] 290 if mailserver: [14:08] 291 print 'Using custom SMTP server:', mailserver [14:08] 292 else: [14:08] 293 mailserver = 'fiordland.ubuntu.com' [14:09] Oh, I was taking open relay to mean you could relay to anywhere from anywhere [14:10] http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/releases-DVD/8.10/release/MD5SUMS.gpg [14:10] mgdm: I meant without auth, from a ubuntu.com address, to any address. [14:10] im wondering how that was created [14:10] it's obviously a clearsigned detached signature of http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/releases-DVD/8.10/release/MD5SUMS [14:11] calc: found the reason for jaxme FTBFS. [14:11] slytherin: eeek! [14:11] slytherin: that's basically the same thing [14:11] I don't think it works like that [14:12] it probably relays from anywhere to LP/ubuntu/canonical [14:12] So we changed it to default to report to Debian? [14:12] This is a very bad idea. [14:12] Kalidarn: Look at the --detach-sign to gpg [14:12] yeah i tried that [14:12] it didnt clearsign though [14:12] Kalidarn: Then you want -a, too [14:12] ScottK: No, the default is to die unless you configure bts=debian [14:13] die with a message pointing to ubuntu-bug [14:13] thanks StevenK [14:13] that did work :) [14:13] sign i am newb ;) [14:13] Laney: isn't bts=debian the default? [14:14] ScottK: The configuration process will set you up to bts=debian, sure, but the patch we've applied kills it before you even get that far [14:14] Laney: I don't see that in your debdiff. [14:15] if not self.options.bts or self.options.bts == "ubuntu": [14:15] bts isn't configured by default, so it bombs out there [14:15] or if the user previously had it set to "ubuntu" [14:17] I see. [14:17] OK. [14:18] I just wonder if it should allow you to carry on instead of sys.exit(1) in the unconfigured case (for bts=ubuntu I agree that this is probably correct) [14:21] Laney: Since you have the package that it's wanted to file the bug against and ubuntu-bug is installed by default (I'm pretty sure) why not just fire it off in this case? [14:21] Or try anyway. [14:25] I don't know. I'll fire off a mail with options later. I guess some people might think that discouraging end-users from using reportbug at all is a good aim [14:26] Laney: Having it end up someplace useful is even better. [14:28] * Laney agrees [14:30] would somebody to give a session at Ubuntu Developer Week about "how to collaborate best with Debian"? [14:30] ScottK: Do you think it's a good idea to update reportbug anyway? There's no regression from what's in Jaunty now, and 3.47 could break at any time for people who haven't set up an alternative SMTP host to use [14:30] we still have some open slots [14:30] dholbach: Someone from Debian might be best to do that? [14:31] Laney: best somebody from Ubuntu and somebody from Debian? :) [14:31] well, yes [14:31] Debian: Here's what we want you to do [14:31] Ubuntu: Here's how to do it? [14:32] it'd be great to talk about how to forward patches, which patches, how to use the bts, etc [14:32] how to link bugs in LP [14:32] who to talk to [14:32] etc === AstralJa1a is now known as AstralJava [15:00] ScottK: ping [15:12] hanska: Pong. [15:13] ScottK: are you one of the bash-completion maintainers? [15:13] hanska: No. [15:13] ScottK: sorry then, I was looking for the maintainers, and I saw your name on LP [15:13] Virtually everything in Ubuntu is at least formally team maintained. I'd suggest looking at debian/changelog to see who's been active on the package. [15:13] Weird. [15:14] ScottK: the fact is that Ubuntu guys keep forking an old version of bash-completion [15:14] while me and other guys have already released newer versions [15:14] (the Debian team became upstream a while ago, and now we also have Fedora and Gentoo guys with us) [15:14] so.. I was sending a mail, I'd like to know whom to send it to :) [15:16] Right. [15:16] hanska: send it to ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com [15:16] Even better subscribe first so it doesn't get moderated. [15:16] hanska: oh wait, the package is in main, so send to ubuntu-devel-discuss@l.u.c [15:16] slytherin: I was sending it to the guy who provided the debdiff, the MOTU who did the actual upload [15:17] s/MOTU/I_don't_know_how_people_uploading_in_main_are_called/ [15:17] :) [15:17] they are called core-dev. [15:17] :-) [15:17] ah, great :) [15:24] slytherin: ubuntu-devel-discuss or just ubuntu-devel? [15:25] (I saw also the latter @ l.u.c) [15:25] hanska: devel-discuss and subscribe first so it doesn't get moderated. [15:26] hanska: ubuntu-devel-discuss. [15:26] ScottK: I believe that posting through gmane doesn't get moderated either [15:26] OK. I'd find that suprising. [15:27] Sent. Let's see if it arrives. [15:28] (otherwise I'll just cancel the post, subscribe and re-send) [15:29] hanska: lists.ubuntu.com does helpfully send backscatter to tell you you're moderated. [15:29] ScottK: seems like it arrived, instead. Please check :) [15:30] (I believe gmane.org is automagically accepted, since it requests a confirmation mail before sending the *first* mail) [15:30] * ScottK hasn't got it yet. [15:31] ScottK: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2009-January/006617.html [15:31] ;) [15:32] Got it now. [15:33] hanska: If you can verify that all the Ubuntu changes are in the current Debian package, you can file a sync request. [15:33] ScottK: it's not just a sync request [15:33] ScottK: it's about joining forces. [15:34] hanska: I agree that you have a broader agenda, but the narrower purpose is useful too. [15:34] in what ways? [15:34] I don't know how much reply you're going to get since no one person is minding the package. [15:34] Getting Ubuntu to use the same as Debian instead of the old one. [15:35] ScottK: It's not about *Debian*, did you see who's in the team? [15:35] Once it's updated, then it's easier to see the use in working with Debian. [15:35] we're Debian, Fedora/RH, Gentoo [15:35] hanska: Yes, but from my perspective as an Ubuntu developer, Debian is upstream. [15:36] ScottK: better!. Let me explain [15:36] You ("generic" you) receive a bug about bashcomp in LP. What are you going to do? [15:36] if the package has been synced from Debian, "fork" an *-ubuntu? version from it, and do the changes there [15:36] Look at it, if I can fix it, upload the fix to Ubuntu and send a patch to Debian in the BTS. [15:37] ScottK: no one has ever done that. [15:37] That's because it's so forked at the moment. [15:37] ScottK: I keep receiving Ubuntu Merge-o-matic mails about new uploads, and just keep merging changes from you [15:37] it's *annoying*. [15:37] Understand. [15:38] best would be if an Ubuntu core-dev/MOTU/$with_uploads_power was part of upstream [15:38] What I'm describing is the 'normal' maintenance approach for packages we get from Debian. [15:38] hanska: Except that that would be everyone. That's a bit much. [15:38] ScottK: we need just *one*! [15:39] btw, that was just a suggestion [15:39] Right, and looking at the history in debian/changelog, except for maybe bryce, I don't know who that would be. [15:39] we're being a cross-distribution group now, and having someone from you guys would be great. [15:40] The question is who. In the meantime if it were sync'ed then the odds of people working at least with Debian would go way up. [15:40] * DktrKranz could have a look at our bash-completion package to see if it can be synced [15:40] DktrKranz: thank you. [15:40] and eventually follow its maintenance [15:40] Excellent. [15:40] ScottK: I understand Ubuntu's dev model is kinda different from ours [15:41] it's in main, so it's quite important because almost everyone uses it [15:41] after all, we needed just one volunteer (which seems to have shown up :)) [15:41] DktrKranz: Agreed. [15:41] DktrKranz: if you see Debian's changelog, you can see we did quite a lot of improvements. [15:41] hanska: I see :) I use it every day, so I can beta-test it before Feature Freeze [15:42] DktrKranz: http://bash-completion.alioth.debian.org/ [15:42] instructions for bzr ;) [15:42] and -- really -- we would have chosen git, but chose bzr for you *lol* [15:43] :) [15:43] * DktrKranz likes git... [15:43] DktrKranz: sure, but I didn't know "the Ubuntu guy" would have been some git-fanboy :P [15:43] Anyone has time to help me debug an FTBFS? Here: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/illuminator/0.11.0-1/+build/752609 [15:44] * ScottK looks over at NCommander. [15:44] mok0: petsc-dev: Depends: libpetsc2.3.3-dev but it is not installable [15:44] hanska: right [15:44] uh, wait, I goofed [15:45] ScottK, its just a misidentified depwait [15:45] Oh. [15:45] * ScottK should have looked before calling in the expert. [15:45] find what package libpetsc belongs do, and fix it :-) [15:45] package is not a valid distribution ['dapper', 'gutsy', 'gutsy-backports', 'hardy', 'hardy-backports', 'intrepid', 'intrepid-backports', 'jaunty', 'jaunty-backports', 'kde4-ppa', 'kubuntu-members-kde4', 'medibuntu', 'partner'] [15:45] hi, i packaged the fonts of the android mobile platform, could someone review them? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=ttf-droid [15:46] it's a small, uncomplicated package, nothing big [15:46] MOTU-related question: is it possible to review packages not being a MOTU? [15:46] hanska, yes [15:47] hanska: What you can't do is advocate them as ready for upload. People who know about packaging, but aren't MOTU are encouraged to help out with reviews. [15:47] soc: since you repackaged the tarball, in these days I suggested you to provide a get-orig-source target [15:47] but, well... "This package has no debian/watch file or get-orig-source rule.". [15:47] hanska: "Oh, this should really go into Debian and I can help you get it sponsored there" is a really good comment we like to see. [15:48] hanska: That's a good comment as most MOTU would reject a package that didn't have one or the other. [15:48] ScottK: IANADD, still in NM, so I can't really sponsor anything ;) [15:48] hanska: imo it is not possible to get an original tarball by an automated script [15:48] soc: why not? [15:48] Right, but if you're on a team in Debian that has willing DD's ... [15:48] i wrote the url to download the latest version into the control file [15:49] hanska: i can't download it via wget [15:49] uscan doesn't work [15:49] no possibility to get the right version [15:49] etc. [15:49] soc: there are other ways too. Let me give a look at the package [15:49] ok, one problem after another: [15:50] a) android uses some weird webgit system, you can download the files, but only via a real browser ... some wierd redirect i guess [15:50] uh? [15:50] is ./debian/bug/ an Ubuntu-specific layout? [15:50] soc: Can you check it out using git? [15:50] it is made for reportbug [15:51] soc: ACK. That could be useful for us too, I believe. [15:51] b) to get the version of the fonts, you have to open them in fontforge and read the version, no way to handle this automatically [15:51] us == Debian [15:51] hanska: No. I've seen that in other font packages. [15:51] ScottK: that might be possible, but doesn't solve the whole problem [15:51] ScottK: never saw that in any Debian package [15:51] soc: Sure it does. You can use git in your get-orig-source rule. [15:51] Debian-proper [15:52] the biggest problem is the version info, which is only inside the font file itself [15:52] hanska: I think I have, but I wouldn't swear to it. [15:52] k [15:52] however soc, reviewing your package ;) [15:52] ScottK: how can i download single files via git? [15:52] soc: Right, then you toss in some awk and sed magic, stir, and presto, new package. [15:53] or do i have to clone the whole repo for it? [15:53] * ScottK is almost completely git ignorant. [15:53] ScottK: so should i just hardcode the version myself? [15:53] You have to clone the whole repository. [15:53] ouch ... ok [15:53] and after that i have to clean up the whole mess again? [15:54] soc: Hard coding is almost always the wrong answer. [15:54] ScottK: so how should i get the version number? [15:54] really, the version is only available inside the font file ... [15:54] * ScottK would have to look at the file and is actually trying to do $WORK currently. [15:55] strings or some font-specific utility that can parse the metadata both spring to mind. [15:55] get-orig-source is a normal bash-file? [15:55] broonie: do you know a utility that can do that? [15:56] soc: See plasmoid-kbstate for a package with an svn oriented get-orig-source that works. [15:56] That'll at least point you in the right direction. [15:56] You might even be able to convince JontheEchidna to help you. [15:56] Since he's like trying to get approved to be a MOTU and all right now. [15:59] hanska: Look at ttf-sil-scheherazade for a package in Debian that has the bug dir. [16:00] btw, what's the idea of that get-orig-source? [16:00] ScottK: I'll do, thank you [16:00] soc: almost completed the review :) [16:00] soc: It exports the head of the svn trunk and makes a tarball out of it. [16:01] in general i mean [16:01] afaik, even if the developer uses that script to get exactly the same files again, his tarball won't have the original hash, because of the gzip timestamps [16:01] In general it's to automate fetching a new upstream when you can't just download the tarball. [16:02] Right, you don't do it every time. Just for new upstream version/snapshot/etc. [16:02] mhh, but it won't fetch a new upstream version, i thought it should get the original source used to package these files? [16:03] Now get the upstream source for the next version. The idea is to make package updates easier. [16:03] It's just make -f path/to/debian/rules get-orig-source. [16:03] soc: reviewed! [16:04] ./debian/rules get-orig-source even [16:04] mok0: argh :P [16:04] beaten on time [16:04] ok, i guess i just write a script which fetches the latest version of the files and name the package ttf-droid_LOOK-IN-THE-FONTS-METADATA-FOR-VERSION-NUMBER.orig.tar.gz [16:04] hanska: you probably have some stuff I missed :-) [16:04] soc: I don't think that the plan [16:04] soc: there's a watch file for that [16:04] soc: packages are not ment to be built dynamically [16:05] can i use git in that watchfile? [16:05] not sure [16:05] soc: don't they distribute a tarball? [16:05] soc: packages are always built on a concrete upstream release [16:05] no [16:06] soc: at some point in the future, packages will be created directly using the git repo [16:06] soc: ttf-droid_1.2+git20090107.orig.tar.gz ? [16:06] these are the fonts used in the android phone, i guess they will never do a font-release [16:07] pmjdebruijn: the "1.2" part is the problem.. [16:07] soc: isn't there a version number in the metadata [16:07] pmjdebruijn: yes, that's the version from the font's metadata [16:07] good [16:07] use that [16:07] i don't know if there is a command line application to extract that metadata [16:07] that should correspond to a release number if any... [16:07] soc: why would you need a command line application for that? [16:08] soc: see my comments @ REVU [16:08] pmjdebruijn: how should i get the version then? [16:08] soc: I think that makes up for the watch file [16:08] soc: use fontforge? [16:09] soc: you only need to look it up onc [16:09] once* [16:11] soc: check git, lookup the version, tarball it, call it ttf-droid_FONTVER+gitREVISION.orig.tar.gz [16:11] does git have revisions? or just dates? [16:11] it has revisions, but they have no ordering, so are not suitable for version numbers [16:12] then i'd stick with checkout date I guess [16:12] soc: also please note that defoma is going away soon [16:13] mok0: eh ehm. [16:13] mok0: "- Homepage: field should be changed to Vcs-Git: (because it is actually a VCS browser page) " -- this is WRONG [16:14] hanska: I know, see next comment :-) [16:14] mok0: Vcs-* fields are meant for *packaging* VCS's, not upstream code's! ;) [16:14] hanska: uhh [16:14] mok0: no, lol :D [16:14] also Vcs-Browser is for packaging repo [16:14] mok0: He's right. [16:15] Ydrrk [16:15] mok0: :) [16:15] I need to read up on policy [16:15] soc: I reviewed your package too. [16:16] pmjdebruijn: afaiu, everytime i download the fonts, i have to look up the version in fontforge, not only once [16:16] hanska, mok0, pmjdebruijn: thanks! [16:16] soc: I'm trying to write a get-orig-source for you, if you don't mind. [16:19] sure, i would be absolutely happy about that [16:19] the git line is most probably git clone git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/frameworks/base.git [16:20] who is dpaleino? is that you, hanska? [16:20] soc: It is. [16:20] soc: yes [16:20] hanska: just to add to the existing confusion... :-) [16:20] :-) [16:21] mok0: I'm a picky Debian guy, lol :P [16:21] ah ok, regarding: "- the long description seems taken from some kind of online journal -- are you allowed to do it? If no, please rephrase it properly, or do it yourself; " [16:21] * liw wonders about the choice of "hanska" as a nick [16:21] it's from the press release, i assumed that would be the right way [16:21] liw: just "invented" it somehow (who remembers!) about 15 years ago, or so [16:21] at least that text has printed "PRESS RELEASE" on the top... [16:21] hanska, are you aware that it's a word in Finnish, meaning glove? [16:22] liw: no, really :) [16:22] I think you are allowed to use press releases freely [16:22] mok0: you said that defoma is going away, what will happen to that? [16:22] a, good [16:22] mok0: I suppose that too -- but you might never know. [16:22] mok0: Depends on what the license of the press release is. [16:23] exactly. [16:23] soc: I don't know, but it seems that way from d-d [16:23] d-d? [16:23] soc: debian-devel mailing list [16:23] mok0: I can confirm that. defoma is outdated, undermaintained, $bad_adjective_here [16:23] but how will font configuration work then? [16:24] may no fonts in lenny+1? :-P [16:24] mok0, soc: there was some ongoing project on replacing it (I admit I hacked it a bit too), but nothing concrete yet [16:24] mok0: that's called squeeze! :P [16:24] hanska: oh yes. [16:24] i don't understand "- the long description seems taken from some kind of online journal -- are you allowed to do it? If no, please rephrase it properly, or do it yourself; " [16:24] hanska: what Toy Story animal is that? [16:24] oopps, wrong line sorry [16:25] mok0: wikipedia --> [16:25] ;) [16:25] i don't understand " - you forgot the boilerplate (s) -- it’s just ONE upstream author! ;) " [16:25] soc: minor issue ;) [16:25] soc: "Upstream Author:" instead of "Upstream Author(s):" :) [16:25] ah ok [16:26] " - you state that Droid is a trademark of Google Corp. Are you allowed to use it in the package name, the descriptions and so on? " [16:26] that's a very good question ... [16:26] hanska: a 1970's English New Wave band?? [16:26] soc: we in Debian had many problems with trademarks *cough* firefox *cough* [16:27] hanska: That's because of restrictions in mozilla's code license. [16:27] hanska: ah, those little cute aliens [16:27] mok0: yep [16:28] ScottK: the MPL doesn't talk about "Firefox" or "Thunderbird" or "The world with the fox around it"... that's a general-purpose license [16:29] ScottK: the fact is, Mozilla Corp. has trademark over those things -- thus can enforce it / prohibit anyone at will to use those. [16:30] -- and same could do Google. [16:30] hanska: mhh, so should i rename the package to something stupid? [16:31] soc: no, just ensure you can [16:31] soc: example, mail the author and ask him :) [16:31] which author? [16:31] upstream. [16:31] google bought the whole copyright from Steve Matteson ... [16:32] soc: then contact Google! :) [16:32] mhh, is there a email address where i get an answer in the next few years? [16:32] soc: eheh, good question. [16:32] i always thought, that a trademark is no problem as long as it doesn't restrict your rights? [16:33] because then debian couldn't use Linux for instance [16:33] soc: yes, as long as the holder does not enforce you not to use it [16:33] soc: but then neither Ubuntu, Slackware, Gentoo, ... [16:33] ;) [16:34] but that debian problem was that to use the trademark, mozilla wanted specific conditions to be met [16:34] this isn't the case here, afaiu [16:34] soc: however, I'm probably being too picky. Ask an ubuntu dev, maybe in Ubuntu this are different [16:34] soc: did you read any condition anywhere? [16:34] hanska: no, no conditions [16:35] soc: wait, I'll try to look in upstream's homepage [16:35] and normally, poeple are allowed to use trademarks, as long as they don't dilute that brand's image [16:35] soc: you can't suppose things. [16:35] but i want to make sure, that the package can be used in ubuntu _and_ debian [16:36] soc: that's great :) [16:36] AFAIK, trademark isn't a problem unless it's known to actually be a problem. [16:36] so solving that problem is necessary [16:36] soc, btw, you should include the files NOTICE, MODULE_LICENSE_APACHE2 and README.txt [16:36] ScottK: ah ok, thanks [16:37] only in the source build? [16:38] soc: http://www.android.com/branding.html [16:38] 03/ Android Custom Typeface [16:38] The custom typeface may not be used. [16:38] I suppose that's a problem. [16:39] but then again: [16:39] For applications, you can use 'Droid' as part of the name if the application adheres to the Developer Content Policy. [16:39]