https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1690046 --- Comment #33 from jogas@xxxxxxxx --- Morning Dave, here is another iteration: SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jogas/charliecloud/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00976340-charliecloud/charliecloud.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jogas/charliecloud/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00976340-charliecloud/charliecloud-0.9.10-7.fc31.src.rpm I moved the sphinx and sphinx-rtd_theme package requirements under the doc subpackage. I've also added the sed lines you used to modify the doc-src Makefile to ignore warnings (aside from the 'with doc' conditional, the handling is very similar). Finally, the period from doc subpackage summary has been removed. Now, regarding your other doc package concerns, I guess I do not understand what the issue(s) is (are). We list sphinx and sphinx-rtd_theme as package dependencies. These packages supply their own licenses. Our doc-src Makefile and rsts (ASL 2.0) use these other packages to generate man pages and html files. Are you saying the resulting documentation artifacts fall under the sphinx MIT license? And that their licenses need to be listed in /usr/share/licenses/charliecloud-doc-<version>? Apologies if I am missing something trivial or am misinterpreting you. Best, Jordan -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
