Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927269 --- Comment #9 from Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Some more stuff I found: - Upstream ships a COPYING file which you are not packaging as %doc. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text The licence text itself looks very MIT-like, which is good. - glamor_copyarea.c, glamor_copywindow.c, glamor_fill.c, glamor_fillspans.c, glamor_window.c have different licence headers than the rest of the files. They specifically speak about Keith Packard (his name not to be used in advertising, him disclaiming warranties, etc.). I don't think it's an actual problem, though it is a little odd. It might make sense to ask Keith kindly to update the licence headers to match the usual form. - glamor_eglmodule.c contains an additional requirement about the name of the XFree86 Project not to be used in advertising. This is perfectly acceptable, as far as I know. I'm just mentioning it for completeness. - glamor_glyphs.c contains two almost identical licence headers. One speaks about Red Hat, the other about SuSE. Perhaps the authors could agree on changing this to the unified standard form? - glamor_gldispatch.h, glamor_largepixmap.c have no license headers. The headers should be added by upstream. I have just bought a small computer with a AMD E2-1800 APU, with a AMD Radeon HD 7340. Should I be able to test this package on it? How would I do that? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=O5HyTlkh34&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review