On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > If a subpackage is dependent (either implicitly or explicitly) upon a > base package (where a base package is defined as a resulting binary > package from the same source RPM which contains the appropriate > license texts as %doc), it is not necessary for that subpackage to > also include those license texts as %doc. > > However, if a subpackage is independent of any base package (it does > not require it, either implicitly or explicitly), it must include > copies of any license texts (as present in the source) which are > applicable to the files contained within the subpackage. What if the large base package requires a tiny subpackage? For instance, package A has a small A-plugins subpackage and a small A-fonts subpackage which carries only two fonts. Both the A-plugins and the A-fonts subpackages can be used by other software (independent of A), but the main A package needs these subpackages for its own functionality, hence the base package A requires these subpackages. Given that the subpackages carry the same license with the base package A, what package or packages should carry the license file? Orcan PS: Congrats to everyone who read and understood the question. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
