Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225797 --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-12 15:51:30 EDT --- I thought I had commented on this already, but it seems not. Drat. > I've added this workaround. And the package indeed builds fine. > Uh, that's because I'm a stickler for eye-pleasing and I wanted to reserve the > -1 release for the version to import into Fedora CVS. I admit to not really understanding why anyone would care, but as long as what gets checked in is correct then I don't see a problem. > I've checked with upstream and they told me I should consider it as GPLv2+. [...] > I can attach an IRC log snippet if necessary. Can you include that in the package? I checked with spot and he indicated that this is OK as long as you're reasonably certain that the person you were communicating with is the copyright holder. Obviously it will be academic once a version is out, but until then we have to clarify the license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review