https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980168 --- Comment #6 from Eduardo Echeverria <echevemaster@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Richard Marko from comment #5) > (In reply to Eduardo Echeverria from comment #3) > > Hi Richard see > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing: > > Main?rd=Licensing#License_of_Fedora_SPEC_Files not there reason for the > > license be ASL 2.0 in this spec file; at least that this spec be exactly > > equal that of Suse > > I'm not sure which license you are refering to. License: ASL 2.0 field seems > to be correct and the header is from original spec file which seems fine > considering the link you've posted. I Quote the header license of your spec "All modifications and additions to the file contributed by third parties remain the property of their copyright owners, unless otherwise agreed upon. The license for this file, and modifications and additions to the file, is the same license as for the pristine package itself" Note: "is the same license as for the pristine package itself..." Now, I wondering, is this spec, the same spec of suse? if so, mantain the license if not, I quote our guidelines: "All original Fedora contributions are governed by the Fedora Project Contributor Agreement (FPCA). This means that unless a spec file contains an explicit license attribution within it, it is available under the terms of the MIT license." So, Just is a question about the spec license. Best Regards -- 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=mroDDjGRtw&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review