https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1323186 --- Comment #52 from Rick Tierney <rick.tierney@xxxxxxxxx> --- Neil: Now that you have run the review (which seems slightly different from the way I do), I can see where some things are wrong and some things I'm not sure why they're being flagged: 1. - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/java/opa-fmgui/LICENSE <RT>The "LICENSE" file appears on the install line and the %license line, but I don't see that as a duplicate when I run the review - is that wrong? 2. License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. <RT> This one is important, and I forgot to change it! Now that we are no longer distributing 3rd party libraries (except for Gritty, which is LGPL) shouldn't we only list the licenses for opa-fmgui and gritty? If that's the case then the License tag should say BSD and LGPL. 3.[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. <NH> This is asking you to put a comment in the code under the files section to ennumerate which binaries get which license. Though I think opa-fmgui is the only relevant one here, and it has code from all three licenses, no? <RT> I put a comment right above the License: tag stating that a license break-down can be found in the file THIRD-PARTY-README. The MIT license was for SLF4J and MBassador which are no longer included in our package. So it sounds like this comment needs to move under the %file section and maybe it's only relevant to gritty since that's the only one being built and included here. Not sure! I thought it would be more complete if the THIRD-PARTY-README file contained a license breakdown of ALL the libraries we are using. 4. [! ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. <NH> Spec file should mark the readme and third-party-readme as %doc <RT> I played with this before and kept getting warnings about file duplication. Maybe I can mark these with the %doc macro and they will get installed without using the "install" command. I can try that. -- 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