https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116217 --- Comment #8 from Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> --- I think you two were talking past each other. Something can be bundled in the source but not used in the resultant package that doesn't count. That being said, he was correct that "bundled stuff you're not using should be rm -rf'd" so you're sure it doesn't sneak in later by accident and upstreams build system should be able to handle optional dependencies sources being removed (I've submitted a fair few PRs due to this over the years). Bundled sources that you do use in the resultant binary/library obviously do count, so in this case BSD 2/3 Clause due to the bundled mos. It's not common but it's entirely possible for a subpackage to have different license references from the main package (or other sub-packages) but in practice I don't think packagers/reviewers generally dig that far. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116217 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
