Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472149 --- Comment #4 from Tim Fenn <fenn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-11-21 19:05:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > Can you indicate where you see a statement that this package is under LGPLv3? > All I see is the COPYING file, which has the usual language indicating that any > LGPL version applies unless there is some indication of a specific choice of > version. This would indicate LGPLv2+ (since there was no LGPLv1). > Sorry, I assumed LGPLv3 since it says "version 3" at the top of the copying file, and appears to be an exact copy of: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.txt > > Is there any reason to have the "data" directory, instead of just putting the > monomers directly into %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}? It just seems a bit odd > to have two successive directories with nothing in them except for another > directory. Right - the only reason for that is most programs that access the data assume the files are under datadir/data/monomers/ - I can simply make a symbolic link instead, though, if that would be more appropriate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review