https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1072054 --- Comment #10 from Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> --- Looks nice, but I think the licensing stuff needs a bit more work. The license tag now reads "GPLv3+, MIT" but it's still a bit unclear. There are more licenses used -- in particular I've found files with LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+. Not sure how to best write it in the license tag. I guess one option would be to only specify the strictest license (''License: GPLv3+' in this case), or alternatively list all of them ('License: GPLv3+ and GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and MIT'). Note that I haven't done a full license audit so there might be more. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ#Multiple_licensing_situations Another licensing issue is that the rpm should ship all the LICENSE files. A few are in the subdirectories: backends/css/gems/sass-3.2.12/MIT-LICENSE backends/css/gems/sass-3.2.12/vendor/listen/LICENSE backends/go/deps/src/github.com/jessevdk/go-flags/LICENSE backends/go/deps/src/github.com/guelfey/go.dbus/LICENSE backends/go/deps/src/code.google.com/p/go.tools/LICENSE The webkitgtk3 package has a add_to_doc_files() macro to deal with multiple license files, might be worth copying it from there: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/webkitgtk3.git/tree/webkitgtk3.spec -- 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