[01:24] <jose> hey guys, anyone around?
[01:29] <smoser> can someone bump the priority of https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cloud-archive/+archive/cloud-tools-staging/+build/5187073 for me
[01:30] <smoser> i'd really like to get that through to the cloud-archive earlier than "8 hours"
[01:30] <smoser> bigjools, can you do that  i wonder?
[01:30] <smoser> i'm walking away now, but if someone could dlo that i'd really appreciate it.
[01:30] <smoser> than
[01:30] <bigjools> smoser: ask webops
[01:30] <smoser> ?
[01:31] <bigjools> they will do it for you, I can't any more
[08:16] <Fudge> cjwatson  do you have admin joy across Launchpad?
[10:43] <JonnyJD_> Since https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/237445 just expired. I guess you can practically host proprietary software on launchpad for free?
[11:08] <czajkowski> wgrant: ^
[11:15] <wgrant> JonnyJD_: That question fell through the cracks, apparently. But the software in question is acceptable for distribution in a PPA, though the service is not intended for, and we discourage its use in, the distribution of non-free software.
[11:15] <JonnyJD_> wgrant: ah okay.
[13:03] <cjwatson> Fudge: Not in general.  I have some privileges
[13:04] <cjwatson> Particularly in relation to Ubuntu
[19:19] <Fudge> cjwatson  I can crack on with it, just have not had any luck yet.
[19:34] <cjwatson> Your problem as you previously described it doesn't require any special privileges
[19:37] <cjwatson> ./remove-package -p vinux --ppa-name=precise-updates -s precise -a armel -a armhf -a powerpc -b -m "remove extra archs Vinux does not support" firefox firefox-dev firefox-dbg ...   (I'm not going to work out all the binary package names involved here)
[19:37] <cjwatson> (I didn't notice your mistake with -p/--ppa-name when you last commented)
[19:38] <cjwatson> FWIW you'd have got an answer more quickly if you'd said what error you were encountering :-)
[19:40] <Fudge> cjwatson  thank you, I didn't want to bother you :$
[21:26] <Fudge> very helpful thank you so much :D
[22:52] <mark06> are licensing terms implied from a merge proposal?
[22:53] <mark06> what if I receive a merge proposal without any license/copyright notice?
[22:53] <mark06> can I add it myself for the author, or do they have to?
[22:57] <cjwatson> There's nothing special about merge proposals for this purpose.  You can substitute "patch" for "merge proposal" and the question is exactly the same.
[22:57] <cjwatson> The answer may well depend on your jurisdiction or something and I don't think I want to attempt to answer it in case it might count as legal advice ...
[22:58] <cjwatson> The safe answer is to ask the author, of course
[22:58] <cjwatson> I believe organisations like the FSF have some general guidance on this kind of thing
[22:58] <mark06> I would take legal advice from unknown people in IRC, don't worry
[22:59] <mark06> yeah I think it's safer requesting the author...
[22:59] <mark06> I just wondered if that was something no one cared about...
[22:59] <cjwatson> For instance https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant is what the FSF thinks
[22:59] <cjwatson> (Though I've also seen assertions that that's US-centric advice)
[23:00] <mark06> like when TLS flaws exposed basically whole internet, and no one gave a damn
[23:00] <mark06> *I would *NOT* take legal advice from unknown people in IRC, don't worry
[23:01] <mark06> I remember reading something about 10 lines... for copyright purposes...
[23:03] <mark06> thanks anyway cjwatson, I went for the safe option: https://code.launchpad.net/~vlad-lesin/pidgin-ircaway/easy_build/+merge/170990
[23:04] <cjwatson> I suspect all this stuff winds up in case law and hence is hideously difficult to dig out
[23:04] <cjwatson> Don't think I've ever heard of statute law that sets a minimum number of lines or anything like that