https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259210 Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx CC| |decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- > # FIXME: no license files detected This needs to be addressed in some way. It looks like the upstream repository actually contains license files, but they are not linked into this subdirectory, so "cargo publish" will not include them. Both the Apache-2.0 and MIT licenses require that redistributed sources contain a copy of the actual license text, so this is a hard requirement for us. Please report this to the upstream project and ask them to include license texts in all published crates. Here's an example of a similar report that I filed a while ago: https://github.com/Devolutions/picky-rs/issues/230 It is usually fixed easily by adding symbolic links: https://github.com/djc/askama/pull/947 PS: I'm curious, what are you packaging this crate for? -- 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=2259210 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202259210%23c2 -- _______________________________________________ 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
