https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1202063 --- Comment #13 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antti Järvinen from comment #12) > - 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. > Note: Cannot find LICENSE in rpm(s) > See: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > -> > The binary rpm does install /usr/share/licenses/classified-ads/LICENSE > and in spec that is done using %license keyword - is the tool failing > to detect that or what? No change done due to this reported issue. fedora-review hasn't been adapted yet to the relatively new %license macro. I think a patch is in review to fix that. -- 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