https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1356048 --- Comment #12 from Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #11) Thanks for the review. > - hicolor-icon-theme as Requires package is missing > Also it was wrongly packaged to own directories it shouldn't own, fixed. > - -doc sub-package does not provide an own license file Why it should provide its own license file? The docs are licensing under the same license as the main package and it's dependent on the main package, from the doc: > Both this document and the RLTSDR Scanner is licensed under the GNU General > Public License version 3 (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html). According to [1]: > If a subpackage is dependent (either implicitly or explicitly) upon a base > package (where a base package is defined as a resulting binary package from the > same source RPM which contains the appropriate license texts as %license), > it is not necessary for that subpackage to also include those license > texts as %license. Well, I have now a dilemma, whether the resulting license is GPLv3 or GPLv3+ as stated on the different place of the sources. I took the documentation as more authoritative source and fixed the resulting license to be GPLv3, but I will query upstream about their intention. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing -- 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