On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 4:47 AM Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > V Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 01:54:10PM -0600, Jilayne Lovejoy napsal(a): > > On 7/22/22 10:43 AM, Maxwell G wrote: > > > Jul 22, 2022 11:37:18 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > > > > > There is some stuff I see relating to license file inclusion > > > Are you talking about the `%golicenses` part? That's not a legal > > > guideline. The go macros just have a special way of installing licenses, > > > as opposed to marking them with %license in %files. This part should be > > > kept in the Go Packaging Guidelines. > > you're right, that is not a legal guideline - wrong link, too many windows > > open! > > > > This one has a bit (that is now covered in the new docs and outdated) > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/#_license_tag > > > This is there because most of the Perl packages uses this license combination. > It helps packagers to identify the typical license correctly. > > Feel free to copy (and reword) it into licensing guidelines. Then Perl > packaging guidelines will replace the section with a link to that advice in > licensing guidelines. Is it Ok? Please only make the advice linkable. What do you think of this? https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-legal-docs/-/blob/main/modules/ROOT/pages/license-field.adoc#user-content-perl-packages Note that we have an open issue to reassess the various pre-Artistic 2.0 versions of the Artistic License. Richard _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-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/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
