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=708765 --- Comment #43 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2011-06-03 15:39:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #42) > These are some C files that are licensed differently because they are generic > enough to be useful outside of this project, I'm not sure where you are seeing > a library here. Yes, generic files in a separate folder with the name of a former library. There are still many websites with references to flicksoup as a library. You even find it packaged separately on a cygwin site. I don't want to argue here. I just suggest to ensure that we provide a package that conforms the guidelines and that the latest changes are sufficient. So where's the problem to simply ask the FPC people? But if you think it's not necessary, then please continue. -- 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