On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 17:48:23 +0200 Till Maas <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 03:05:21PM -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Till Maas <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > The guideline should be to ask upstream to fix the meta data. In > > > case of missing license text (e.g. source code with a GPL header > > > but no copy of the GPL itself), it is also upstream's task to fix > > > it and the packager's to ask for it. And if upstream fixes it, > > > the debian font packagers do not need to replicate Fedora's > > > effort. > > > > We absolutely want this fixed upstream first. I adjusted the draft > > to reflect this: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/FontsPolicy > > > > Sometime this week I'm going to file bugs against all the affected > > font packages to give packages an opportunity to work with their > > upstreams to correct this. > > Please provide actual recommendations about how to run the ttname > command to the guidelines before filing bugs. And get the guideline > approved to avoid unnecessary changes. Also this does not seem to be > really a MUST guideline as long as it is not a MUST guideline to add > the GPL license text to all GPL licensed packages if the license text > is not included. If you are going to file a bunch of bugs, PLEASE see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mass_bug_filing Thanks, kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
