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=573917 Ruediger Landmann <r.landmann@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks| |182235(FE-Legal) AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |r.landmann@xxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Ruediger Landmann <r.landmann@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-03-21 18:18:48 EDT --- Thanks for the quick work! Actually, there's one last step we should take, and that's to include a copy of the GPL with the package. (Second dot point in comment #2) >From the email, it sounds like it's unlikely that upstream will generate a new tarball for us, so instead could you please contact them again and: * attach a copy of the GPLv1 (not any other version) to the email * ask upstream if they're OK with you including a copy of that document in the Fedora package. We've just had a similar situation arise with another perl module, and the advice above is based on what I got from Spot on legal list.[0] Cheers, Rudi [0] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-March/001584.html -- 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