https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2203529 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST --- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- > With the removal of internal libraries, looking at source code, the License are under BSD-3-Clause. Although fedora-review tools also reports other license, which seems to be caused by the license files at https://github.com/Blosc/c-blosc2/tree/main/LICENSES, no influence on the license field of .spec file. Yeah. One of the files there is for some windows header, and I think one is unused (https://github.com/Blosc/c-blosc2/issues/4951), and a few are for the unbundled stuff. I also noticed that licensecheck shows the license files are being under their licence. This is not useful, and actually wrong. Quite often the license text is under a different license that doesn't permit modifications. Alas. > # patch link or comment on the reasons of the patch file I added a comment. Thanks! -- 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=2203529 _______________________________________________ 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
