On 11/08/2009 03:10 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplicate_Files is > pretty clear: > > ---- > Duplicate Files > > A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's > %files listings. If you think your package is a valid exception to this, > please bring it to the attention of the Packaging Committee so they can > improve on this Guideline. > ---- > > However, some packagers absolutely insist on duplicating license files > (say, once in the main package, and again in the -devel package) and > this issue keeps coming up. > > Can we make a clear determination as to whether there are circumstances > where duplication of license files is permitted, and clearly outline > those situations in the guidelines? My understanding of the current > opinion from the legal folks is that we must duplicate the license files > if there's no clear dependency chain between the packages. Otherwise I > think that we have enough duplicated copies of the GPL floating around > and we should try to keep the number down where we can. How about something like this: * For binary RPMs, the complete set of license files (as provided by upstream) must be included in the %doc section of either the main binary rpm or a common RPM that the other binary sub-packages depend on. Independent sub-packages are required to include their own copy of the relevant license texts (as provided by upstream). ~spot -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
