https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045863 --- Comment #4 from Gerard Ryan <gerard@xxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the review Gil, it's much appreciated! (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > ISSUES: > > [!]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) > in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) > for the package is included in %doc. > > [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file > from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. > > [!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. Regarding the first and third issues, I think EPL-licensed packages must include license file, is that correct? If not, I'll take it out. Regarding the second issue, I've just queried upstream to include license text in the following pull request on github: https://github.com/tesla/tesla-filelock/pull/1 Let me know if there's anything else you would like me to do to get this through review. Thanks again! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review