https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1991202 --- Comment #9 from Didik Supriadi <didiksupriadi41@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Stefan Bluhm from comment #8) > > License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > > I think there might be misunderstanding from my side. I understood that this > is the licensing of the package and not the content. That is why I picked > that one. Should it be the license of the source files? Oops, I was claiming Indiana License looks like BSD, I was wrong. it definitely looks like ASL 1.1 (See http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-1.1) But you could see the xpp3-*.pom files for the licenses. It is indeed a Public Domain. So I think it will be "License: ASL 1.1 and Public Domain". -- 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
