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=444366 --- Comment #23 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-11-20 16:20:28 EDT --- Hi Ville, I wasn't very sure what to put for the license tag since no source file that contains code specifies a license in its header. There is only the LICENSE file that claims GPL3, even that file just mentions it in two lines and does not give the full text of GPL3. I have seen in some reviews that whenever the source code files do not specify a specific version of GPL, a generic version (like GPL+ ot GPLv2+) was picked. So do you think that whatever says in that LICENSE file, is enough to specify that the package is GPL3? I'm doing the other changes you asked and update the packages soon. Thanks for the review. -- 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 [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
