https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1978395 Christopher Engelhard <ce@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(ce@xxxxxxx) | --- Comment #3 from Christopher Engelhard <ce@xxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Otto Urpelainen from comment #2) > This is a problem that affects all or almost all rubygem packages. > When I was creating this package, I asked about font bunding > in the ruby-sig mailing list [1], you can find more information there. Thanks, I'll take a look. > The license does not belong to specfile License field, > because that is only for the main ("binary") rpm > as described in Licensing Guidelines section License: field [4]. Right, sorry, my mistake. > Do you accept this explanation? > We can also continue the discussion on the ruby-sig list > since this is relevant affects very many rubygem packages. Yes, this seems fine. Probably a good idea to come up with some sort of policy on this at some point, but since you already brought the overall issue to the ruby-sig list I'd say we're good here. Thanks for the packaging effort & for reporting all these issues etc. upstream/ to the discussion lists. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
