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=478917 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Sailer <t.sailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-18 16:44:47 EDT --- I understand that you want to keep the packages the same, this is a good thing. However, omitting the license file makes me nervous. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines states that the license file _must_ be included if the source archive contains one. The source archive downloaded from upstream contains a license file - just not in the directory that gets repackaged. I find Orcan Ogetbil's argument that the license file needs to be in the repackaged subdirectory quite unsustainable. IANAL but I think you're on pretty thin ice here. Ok about the rest. -- 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