https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2217729 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(loganjerry@gmail. | |com) --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> --- I stopped doing the review at ... ----- Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "ISC License", "*No copyright* ISC License", "MIT License". 44 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/tmp/2217729-ocaml-yaml/licensecheck.txt The licensecheck output isn't very accurate, but I checked the upstream sources instead and they're correctly annotated for ISC. However the bundled copy of libyaml is MIT licensed, so I believe the License field should probably be: ISC AND MIT A larger problem here is that we need a FPC exception to add the bundled libyaml to Fedora, unless we can work out how to unbundle it (which I'd prefer, actually). The situation is not ideal to say the least. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. (See above) ----- I think it'd be useful to try to find out exactly how upstream have modified libyaml, and work out if those changes are invasive or not, and if they can be separated out. I might have a look into this later. -- 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=2217729 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202217729%23c3 _______________________________________________ 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
