On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 21:45 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > It's quite simple: You have to agree on a common language (or a limited > > set of thereof) otherwise you can't communicate with your customers > > (here: users) and 3rd parties (here: authorities). For a US based > > distro, I'd expect this language to be English. > > Correct. The license not being readable is a misleading exaggeration but > the underlying point is valid. We need review guidelines that enforce > this and bugs should be filed against packages which don't have license > text in English. > > Ralf, do you know of other packages beside the example you cited? Not off head. I was aware about the mecab case because I had blocked the review due to lack of "applicable license", when Spot had OK'ed it after a Japanese email had been added. Without having checked details, I'd expect other "primarily Japanese audience/Asian language packages" having the same issue. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
