https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133080 --- Comment #5 from David Shea <reallylongword@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to David Shea from comment #4) > > [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > > [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown > > must be documented in the spec. > > > > You should update the specfile to use SPDX identifier. AFAIK, the license > > breakdown > > is no more required. > > I didn't think the SPDX identifiers were ready yet? Based on > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_1 and the linked > tracking bug. I can pare the list down to just MPL though since it's GPL > compatible. I see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/ uses SPDX identifiers now. Whatever, I'll change it. -- 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=2133080 _______________________________________________ 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
