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=484798 --- Comment #3 from Deji Akingunola <dakingun@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-16 23:20:03 EDT --- Thank so much you for the detailed review. On the various issues raised, upstream Developers have worked to clean up the code to now compile without any warning at all (they've also followed your advice and added -Werror to the build flags). A new release is scheduled to come out shortly with this fixes and others. On the licensing issue, I or other folks upstream can't find where documentation differs from what's stated in the src files, they all seems to say GPLv2+. Can you please point me to the documentation that states only "GPLv2". Concerning the documentation license, I've been informed that the documentation is licensed under GFDL *without invariant* sections. Hence it's almost like gpl / CC by-at sh-al no-co. And that this should not be a problem since the worst issue with GFDL are invariant sections. All the other editorial spec file issues have been taken care of too. Will upload the new spec and srpm as soon as the new release becomes available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review