https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763147 --- Comment #3 from Elliott Sales de Andrade <quantum.analyst@xxxxxxxxx> --- That's only a recommendation of the FSF for GPL. It's not required to annotate all source files, and just take a look at the instructions on the sidebar for choose a license, for example: https://choosealicense.com/licenses/mit/ tldr legal: https://tldrlegal.com/license/mit-license "You must include the license notice in all copies or substantial uses of the work." or this SE answer: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/4534/how-to-apply-mit-license-in-the-github-repo-for-fully-free-project "No, a license header is not necessary, at least for MIT and the Unlicense. Some other licenses encourage you to add such a header but that is not the case of these two." -- 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
