https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427341
--- Comment #43 from Miro Hrončok <[email protected]> --- (In reply to VincentS from comment #42) > So, after all you said. Should I put "GPLv2 and GPLv2+ and MIT and CC-BY-SA" > as package licence and only "CC-BY-SA" as docs subpackage licence ? I'd go with "GPLv2 and GPLv2+ and MIT" as the main package licence (note that it specifies the license of the built binary RPM, not the whole source RPM) and "CC-BY-SA" as docs subpackage licence. -- 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] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
