Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: redland https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195647 ------- Additional Comments From thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-09 07:40 EST ------- Thanks for reviewing! Wrt. your issues: 1) Any LGPL package is always allowed to be used under the GPL - this is a standard "feature" of the LGPL. As such I don't think it's necessary to add it to the license field, since I don't see any other LGPL package doing that. What do you think ? 2) yep, will add that 4) will file that bug now. 5) IMO this is up to upstream if this should be changed. I don't necessarily feel it should - the headers seem to be namespaced with rdf_ - but in any case I don't think packagers should make changes like this if they are not strictly necessary because it creates problems for developers. What do you think ? I will push a new package when we resolve 1) and 5) Thanks Thomas -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review