https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1323966 --- Comment #2 from Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Unfortunately, I found a potentially "fun" licensing problem with the USB code in stmhal/usbhost: https://github.com/micropython/micropython/issues/26 Specifically, the code in that directory is under http://www.st.com/web/en/resource/legal/legal_agreement/license_agreement/ultimate-liberty-v2.txt?sc=software_license_agreement_liberty_v2 which isn't an open source license The notice of that license in the source tarball is in stmhal/usbhost/Release_Notes.html The other slightly dubious piece in the embedded system parts of the tarball is what looks to be a pre-built binary at cc3200/bootmanager/relocator/relocator.bin The MicroPython-for-Unix build doesn't *use* any of those pieces, but I'm not sure of the potential implications of having them in the SRPM. Should this BZ be set to block FE-Legal to ask them the question? A couple of other items worth taking a second look at: - fedora-review complained about the LICENSE file being marked as %doc instead of %license - there's a micropython-upip tarball embedded in the tools directory which I haven't looked inside yet (I'm still working through the rest of the review checklist, but figured it made sense to raise these items immediately rather than waiting) -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx