https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1886458 --- Comment #2 from Javier Martinez Canillas <fmartine@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #1) Thanks a lot for the review! [snip] > > SHOULD: > > [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. > > Please notify upstream that they should include the LICENSE file in the > _derive Proposed fix merged at https://github.com/palfrey/serial_test/commit/4997bc3d56d. > sub-crate as well, and put a comment with a link to the upstream issue into > the > .spec file. Most of the time, this can be accomplished by adding a symlink > like > `LICENSE → ../LICENSE` in the sub-crate. > Also added a comment in the .spec file referencing that upstream commit. Both the .spec file and SRPM mentioned in Description have been updated. It would be great if you could also review Bug 1886463 that's blocked by this. -- 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
