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=708934 --- Comment #4 from Marcela MaÅlÃÅovà <mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-05-31 07:07:50 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > > Imho in license should be postgresql instead of BSD. > > I have explicitly asked upstream about versions and they state that the content > of BSD file is wrong, but the BSD license is correct. The upstream issue is > referenced in .spec file, so I think we should be OK. > >From your comment (License is not that clear) isn't clear, that you have statement from upstream. Sometimes is in specfile included email, where was license claimed. And you should fix new rpmlint complaints: rpmlint rubygem-pg-doc-0.11.0-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGconn/nonblocking%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGconn/internal_encoding%3d-i.yaml %3d rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGresult/%5b%5d-i.yaml %5b rubygem-pg-doc.x86_64: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/pg-0.11.0/ri/PGresult/%5b%5d-i.yaml %5d Also license is not packaged in any of sub-packages. -- 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