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=497622 --- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2009-05-04 04:31:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > > MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. > > - Stuff under contrib/ seems to be licensed under LGPLv2+, but nothing seems to > > be packaged from there. > > > > the libraries that are built in contrib/ are lumped into libapbs.so* (along > with some of the BSD licensed functions) - I've made note of the dual license, > is it sufficient/OK to annotate the .so files as "BSD and LGPLv2+" in the > %files section and add a PACKAGE-LICENSING file? Damn. Then the current packaging is a no-go: you must strip apbs of the contrib packages and package them separately. At least maloc and pmg have upstreams here: http://fetk.org/ Btw, you're maintaining PyMOL, right? Does it include an own copy of apbs? If so, it should be modified to use this package instead. -- 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