https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955 --- Comment #5 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #4) > It's a false problem. Those files are not involved during the compilation > neither packed in the binary rpms. Does this also apply to the bundled headers in include/seqan/stream? In any case they should then be removed in %prep, right? [1] > Many apps are released under BSD, others under LGPv3+ and GPLv3+. These > licenses are compatible among them, therefore the resultant binary rpm can > be licensed under a single collective license (GPLv3+). I have no overall problem with that conclusion. However, a statement describing the grounds for it is required - that is, the actual license for the different files. This is a bit convoluted as of now, but would become clearer after removing unused stuff in %prep. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries -- 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
