https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243758 --- Comment #22 from Till Hofmann <hofmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #21) > (In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #20) > > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #19) > > > (In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #16) > > > > (In reply to Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) from comment > > > > #15) > > > > because they haven't replied after one day. Therefore my initial comment 3 > > > > about the license file. > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Good_Licenses > > > see "BSD with attribution" field, > > > and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD_with_Attribution > > > i don't know where you take the "JCharts BSD variant" > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:BSD?rd=Licensing/BSD#jCharts_Variant > > > > All files in jdbm1 are licensed with this variant of BSD (called JDBM > > License in the source). Note that this is not BSD with attribution. If I > > understand the wiki correctly, the license tag should be 'BSD' for jdbm1, > > and 'ASL 2.0 and BSD' for jdbm2. > > Sorry, but jdbm1 and jdbm2 have the same license > > Under Apache (v2.0) license > ---------------------------- > apacheds-jdbm-2.0.0-M3/jdbm1/src/main/java/jdbm/I18n.java > apacheds-jdbm-2.0.0-M3/jdbm1/src/test/java/jdbm/recman/LocationTest.java > Right. I somehow missed these two files. So 'ASL 2.0 and BSD' should be correct for both. -- 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