https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2136778 Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(mhroncok@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #7 from Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> --- No, the packager does not need to repeat the %license thing if the license file is already part of --licensefiles. There is no rule nor recommendation to have licenses in /usr/share/licenses/, the only rule is to make them with %license and %pyproject_save_files already does that, if upstream has the correct metadata. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_example_spec_file and look up %license. My comment for the Root License Directory patch does say that files marked as License-File in upstream metadata are marked as %license in the file list. It does not say that you should duplicate the %license entry at all. -- 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=2136778 _______________________________________________ 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
