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 #4 from Nils Philippsen <nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-17 05:24:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > 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. Great! > 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". Here: http://xiphos.org/manual/license and in help/xiphos.pdf in the source tarball (both mention version GPL v2, but not the option to use "any later version"). > 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. I don't have a problem with the license of the documentation, I'm not sure whether it should be mentioned in the spec file, though. > 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