https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2304820 Felix Schwarz <fschwarz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |fschwarz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Felix Schwarz <fschwarz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- The package itself looks fine, the only problematic thing the license file (as indicated also above by Fedora review): > License file LICENSE is not marked as %license This is mostly a formal point but I think it would be good if you could raise the issue upstream so they can fix it for everyone. Relevant parts from the Fedora packaging guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text > 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. > > In cases where the upstream has chosen a license that requires that a copy of the license text be distributed along with the binaries and/or source code, but does not provide a copy of the license text (in the source tree, or in some rare cases, anywhere), the packager should do their best to point out this confusion to upstream.
