https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1323186 Rick Tierney <rick.tierney@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(nhorman@xxxxxxxxx | |m) --- Comment #28 from Rick Tierney <rick.tierney@xxxxxxxxx> --- >From Comment #12, you wrote: <NH> Package includes License files Third_Party_Copyright_Notices_and_Licenses.docx and THIRD-PARTY-README which seem to relate to code which is not packaged in this srpm. If that is the case, then these files should not be packaged. If it is the case, then the license needs to change in the spec file, the docx files needs to be converted to text and the binaries need to have thier licensing ennumerated. (In reply to Neil Horman from comment #13) > What you need to do is go through the code and determine which code is > licensed in which way. Your spec file indicates its all BSD, but the docs > in the source tarball indicate their are multiple licenses. You need to > figure out how the code is licensed and make the spec file agree with that, > following the conventions in the fedora packaging and licensing guidelines. Neil: The above statements come from comments 12 and 13 and were in response to Robert Amato's questions regarding license files. I'm trying to determine the correct course of action regarding whether to include certain files or not. The driving force here is to comply with Fedora Packaging Guidelines AND satisfy criteria set forth by the Intel Legal Dept for purposes that go beyond the Fedora Packaging process. If these two criteria conflict, then I will have to track two separate branches and I'd prefer not to do that if possible. On the one hand, our Legal team has instructed us to: 1. Include all the 3rd Party license files in same folder as the jar files for the binary RPM. 2. Include the following in both RPM and SRPM: a. Third_Party_Copyright_Notices_and_Licenses: Contains ALL applicable licenses for 3rd parties and more. This was originially a MS-Word document that I changed to a text file. b. LICENSE: BSD (3-clause) for opa-fmgui c. THIRD-PARTY-README: Listing of 3rd party libraries and the location of their license files On the other hand, based on your answers to previous questions we should: a. Remove the Third_Party_Copyright_Notices_and_Licenses and THIRD-PARTY-README files because their source code isn't packaged b. And this part isn't clear to me... whether the license files should be in the RPM lib/ folder with jar files or not. If it is okay to do this then I would rather leave it this way to comply with Intel Legal. I want to make sure I have everything in the right place and omit what is not permitted. Could you weigh in on this? Thanks! Rick -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx