https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297821 --- Comment #5 from Roman Tsisyk <roman@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > Does it have to be a plugin? or can it be a separate library too? libqlcpluswebaccess.so.1 contains GPLv2+ code, that means you have to re-license libqlcpluswebaccess.so under GPLv2+. Your binary linked with shared librarylibqlcpluswebaccess.so => the binary also have to be re-licesned under GPLv2+. That is exactly how copyleft designed to work. > Well these seem to be GPLv2+ so it can be re-licensed to GPLv3 which is compatible with the apache2.0 license Apache 2 software can therefore be included in GPLv3 projects, because the GPLv3 license accepts our software into GPLv3 works. However, GPLv3 software cannot be included in Apache projects. The licenses are incompatible in one direction only, and it is a result of ASF's licensing philosophy and the GPLv3 authors' interpretation of copyright law. [1] [1]: http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html > Not the source tarball for the most recent release, however this is probably because you mentioned the git snapshot package. It looks like an attempt to backport new features from the trunk. Original qclplus 4.10.2b doesn't have these files (=features), right? Why not package 4.10.2b as it was expected by the upstream? It is OK to backport critical bugfixes for security vulnerabilities, crashes, memory leaks and so on. New features should increment at least minor version of software. Please don't mislead the users. > I don't think a snapshot package would go good for this package since the recent development doesn't make it that stable. I would rather keep up with normal releases then going with an unstable snapshot. Yes, that is exactly what I wanted. I agree with the approach to keep up with normal upstream's releases or create an unstable snapshot. > How is that? -data doesn't need anything from lib, data and lib get installed when you install either qlcplus or qlcplus-fixtureeditor I had orphaned qlcplus-data after removing qlcplus and qlcplus-fixtureeditor using dnf. It seems that this problem was caused by `rpm -i *.rpm`. `dnf autoremove` should work for this case when -data installed implicitly as a dependency. Sorry for my inadvertence. -- 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