Dne 01. 08. 24 v 12:28 odp. Peter Lemenkov napsal(a):
Hello! I stumbled upon the following situation. I am packaging a library under MIT license. However the upstream-provided build-script in a tarball explicitly licensed under ISC license (has a header with ISC license). If it matters I do not use this script for building at all. So I have two questions. 1. If a tarball has a differently licensed file which is not going to a final RPM should I still list its license in a spec's %license field? 2. Does it change anything if this file wasn't used at all during RPM build process?
See https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-legal-docs/-/issues/61 > Does not affect the License tag. But the license of the file must be from the allowed list. -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys -- _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
