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=567348 --- Comment #5 from Mads Kiilerich <mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-03-11 09:00:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > On the other hand I think you too should've checked bugzilla or the > fedora-package-review list earlier. Yeah. I checked before contacting upstream, but I took the wrong semaphore. I should have learned from the dining philosophers and taken all of them. Lesson learned for next time ;-) > I see you've already established a relationship with upstream, so if you want I > can leave this package for you to take ownership of. Thanks, but no thanks - you came here first, so please keep going. > I agree with your observations, except for the license field, which should > probably look like this: > > License: GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and BSD and ASL 2.0 and Python > > if guidelines were to be followed: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios You are right. But I think that we have to be pragmatic as long as there are no license violations. For example, I think it is fair enough to say that the linux kernel is GPLv2 even though it (AFAIK) contains files under BSD. > Alternatively we could try convincing upstream to relicense some of those > files. You as packager are free to do it as well. If the package re-license it as GPL then it is GPL. (IANAL) > I was leaving the zip file issue for discussion with the reviewer. IMHO the packager should do all the work and review the package himself to make sure it is perfect. The reviewer should just review and verify. But let us discuss it until we agree that the package is perfect and ready for a formal review. > I don't think there's any reason to create a subpackage since we can't > determine at build time if the user has python3 installed and everyone who has > python3 will probably want py3 support in dreampie. I think we can just install > these "data files" (as upstream calls them) side-by-side for Fedora releases > with python3 (>=F13). Running dreampie against either a py2 or py3 interpreter > is one of the major features of dreampie imho, so it shouldn't be in a > different subpackage. FWIW I disagree. It is not data files but executable code. If python3 is a build dependency (in fedora versions where it is available) then it _is_ installed. Users who want py3 should install py3 packages. Optional dependencies should be in sub-packages. Nothing special here. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review