https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1343161
--- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #1) > Package Review > ============== > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review needed > > > Issues > ------ > - Dual licensed packages should have "or" as an separator and there > should be comment about the dual licensing. See > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging: > LicensingGuidelines#Dual_Licensing_Scenarios Done > And the notice doesn't specify LGPL version, so I think it should have > LGPLv2+ istead of LGPLv2 in the main POM file is specified LGPLv3 and also the file LICENSE-lgpl > [?]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown > must be documented in the spec. Really needed? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[email protected]
