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=499069 --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen <petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-05 01:56:22 EDT --- The License should be GPLv2+ at least or maybe even GPLv3. Not sure if ghc-rpm-macros should not require ghc - macros.ghc is not really useful without it. On the other hand any package that uses the macros will also need to BR ghc I guess anyway, but still it does not seem unreasonable to require ghc in my opinion. Otherwise looks fine to me. -- 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