https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1758626
--- Comment #26 from Laurent Rineau <[email protected]> --- And the License declaration of the package is wrong. As the package bundles other software, the licensing is complicated. (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #12) > [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses > found: "Unknown or generated", "GPL (v3 or later)", "*No copyright* Q > Public License (v1.0) GNU General Public License GNU Lesser General > Public License", "BSD (unspecified)", "*No copyright* BSD > (unspecified)", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License", > "AGPL (v3 or later)", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v3 or > later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" > License", "Expat License". 306 files have unknown license. Detailed > output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/octave- > iso2mesh/review-octave-iso2mesh/licensecheck.txt Here we can see that the license checker has detected a lot of licenses (including AGPLv3+ and GPLv2), so the package cannot be just GPLv3+. -- 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] 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/[email protected]
