https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478705 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Robin Lee from comment #1) > [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses > found: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 137 files have > unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in > /home/cheese/Public/1478705-deepin-calendar/licensecheck.txt It's one of those cases where fedora-review output MUST be post-processed by the reviewer. First of all, the submitter does not have the licensecheck.txt file, so last sentence is not useful to them. You should edit the comment to clarify what is wrong. The License field pertains to the *binary* package [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ#Does_the_License:_tag_cover_the_SRPM_or_the_binary_RPM.3F]. And GPLv3 is a very strong license, so when multiple sources are mixed, it's usual for the result to be covered by GPLv3 and the other licenses to be irrelevant. In this case the .c and .h files have headers that specify GPLv3+ as the license. So there a small error: it should be "License: GPLv3+" (and not GPLv3). It's possible that this is what you had in mind, but it's not immediately obvious from what you wrote ;) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
