https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193210 --- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo <puntogil@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Paulo Andrade from comment #4) > Hi Gil, Hi Paulo, > There are files under Apache and BSD license, so, > license probably should be changed to: > CDDL and ASL 2.0 and BSD > See for example: > sxc-sxc-0.8/sxc-runtime/src/main/java/org/metatype/sxc/util/Base64.java > sxc-sxc-0.8/sxc-xpath/src/test/java/org/metatype/sxc/xpath/StreaxPerformance. > java The last one is a should be consider as test resources, and not interested in the end of the package license. Added for the sub packages sxc-runtime and sxc-javadoc license field CDDL and ASL 2.0 > Please comment about: > # https://gil.fedorapeople.org/dependency-report-plugin-1.0.3-1.fc19.src.rpm > # BuildRequires: mvn(org.codehaus.swizzle:dependency-report-plugin) > Does it mean it is an optional build requires dependency? yes, should be consider as optional. Done > An issue I see in most mvn related packages is > every subpackage having a %license line, because there > is no clean information about a single common subpackage > that all others require. It looks weird that every > subpackage have the line: > %license LICENSE.txt > > Please correct the license tag before pushing to git, > otherwise I consider the package approved. Thanks for your quick review Spec URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/sxc.spec SRPM URL: https://gil.fedorapeople.org/sxc-0.8-1.fc23.src.rpm -- 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