https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833511 --- Comment #14 from Ales Kozumplik <akozumpl@xxxxxxxxxx> --- I removed some of the useless files in 3544ca1d9c1a18825ba3034cd153bd3571d5dae8 and now I am down to these: yum/sqlutils.py : GPLv2 yum/misc.py : unknown yum/parser.py : unknown rpmUtils/transaction.py : GPL rpmUtils/arch.py : unknown At this point DNF unfortunately needs all of those. Seth, 'git log' in yum reveals that yum/misc.py, rpmUtils/transaction.py and rpmUtils/arch.py were started by you. What was the reason to omit the licensing information there? Since it would be hard to get an approval of all the people who contributed to the files in the meantime I changed the licensing in the spec to a "Multiple Licensing Scenario" [1]. Here's the new spec and SRPM: http://akozumpl.fedorapeople.org/review/dnf_4/dnf.spec http://akozumpl.fedorapeople.org/review/dnf_4/dnf-0.2.6-10.git964faae.fc17.src.rpm [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios -- 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