https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913870 code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- This is not a full review, just a few things I saw at first glance. There are several bundled libraries in src/3rdParty. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling. In short, if upstream supports building with an external copy, you must do so. Otherwise, you must contact upstream requesting the ability to do so; then you may either add a virtual Provides for the bundled library or, if you like, find a way to patch it to unbundle yourself. A number of files have copyright headers indicating they have licenses other than MIT. All licenses from files that contribute to the final build need to be in the License field, with some documentation of which license applies to which parts. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_multiple_licensing_scenarios. You can use licensecheck to help look for files that you need to examine. You must validate the AppData XML file in %check; see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/#_app_data_validate_usage. -- 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
