https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244428 --- Comment #3 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #2) > The package cannot be simpler, but it can be better. :) > > > Release:1%{?dist} Good catch > Please add space after : > > > License: MIT > > The guidelines say: > If the source package does not include the text of the license(s), the > packager should contact upstream and encourage them to correct this mistake. > > And because you are the upstream, you should be encouraged to include the > license text. Likely as SourceX. Thx for contacting me ;) I was kind of thinking about omitting the license, because .spec are MIT by default, aren't they? And actually, I don't know if the empty file is even licensable/copyrightable? > But none of the things above justify blocking the review. > > APPROVED Thx a lot. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244428 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244428%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
