https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2150362 --- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- No problem, I was just going through review tickets I'm associated with and updated them all (and made sure none of them were waiting for *me*!) If I understand correctly, yes, including a copy of the license text is a requirement: > 4. Conveying Verbatim Copies. > > You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you > receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and > appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice; > keep intact all notices stating that this License and any > non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code; > keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all > recipients a copy of this License along with the Program. I find this website very useful for things like these: https://choosealicense.com/licenses/gpl-3.0/ (in particular, the "bullet point" summary of the license terms at the top). > Is the missing license text a blocker for the Fedora package? I think so. But I'm not sure how to handle the case where upstream states that they publish code under GPL-3.0 but they *themselves* don't include a copy of the license text ... I don't think RMS thought of this case :D -- 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=2150362 _______________________________________________ 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
