[03:47] <marcoceppi> THERE IS NO DANA, ONLY XUL
[03:52] <imbrandon> I aint afraid of no ghosts ...
[17:43] <MrChrisDruif> Hi everyone. I didn't even know we had "apps" webpages, but how can someone report issues/inclarities to one of those pages? E.g. https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/nitro/
[17:49] <popey> whats wrong with it MrChrisDruif ?
[17:51] <mhall119> MrChrisDruif: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-webcatalog is the project page
[17:51] <MrChrisDruif> According to someone that's actually using the app is the licensing BSD, which isn't proprietary afaik
[17:52] <mhall119> oh, data problem, not code problem
[17:52] <cjohnston> it is bsd
[17:52] <MrChrisDruif> popey; Final line reads "Nitro is also free open source software." If that is true, then why does it say it's proprietary licensed?
[17:53] <mhall119> MrChrisDruif: someone entered the wrong value in a form somewhere
[17:53] <MrChrisDruif> That's why we @ #ubuntu+1 were wondering where you could report things that are wrong?
[17:55] <mhall119> hmmm, I wonder it they sent it through the consumer-apps team
[17:55] <mhall119> MrChrisDruif: have you contacted the developers about this?
[17:56] <MrChrisDruif> No, I didn't even know about apps.ubuntu.com till a few minutes ago.
[17:56] <mhall119> MrChrisDruif: it's listed a proprietary in USC as well
[17:58] <MrChrisDruif> I would've guessed as much. I think the information is pulled from the repos.
[17:58] <mhall119> it's possible it was submitted to the software center under a proprietary license so they could use the consumer-apps review process rather than the ARB review process
[17:58] <popey> haha "https://launchpad.net/nitrotasks"  "Simplified BSD Licence
[17:58] <popey> (Don't steal this software. Thanks.)"
[17:59] <MrChrisDruif> popey; =D lol
[17:59] <popey> i see nitro "on hold" in the "Ubuntu App Developers" trello board
[18:00] <popey> last updated July tho
[18:00] <mhall119> yeah, I think that board is dead
[18:00] <popey> oh ☹
[18:00] <popey> what do you use now?
[18:00] <mhall119> s/board/review process/
[19:17] <JanC> applications can be dual-licensed of course...
[19:23] <czajkowski> yup you can indeed
[19:24] <czajkowski> mhall119: apps can and are dual licenced
[19:33] <mhall119> czajkowski: I know that, but I wasn't sure on the specifics of that one
[19:34] <popey> whether they are or not, the page is still wrong
[19:34] <popey> it is BSD-3-clause
[20:15] <bkerensa> mhall119: yes but I think the big issue is whether Mozilla would be willing to port mobile over since they have a competing platform
[20:15] <bkerensa> It would be nice to see Thunderbird come over though since its a community product now
[20:51] <bkerensa> mhall119: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2013/01/we-interview-the-mechanig-development-team
[20:52] <bkerensa> as requested