https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1867321



--- Comment #4 from Andy Mender <[email protected]> ---
> Thank you for review! For sure ansible-collections-netbox-netbox is my 
> package and I am creator of all those packaging-related macros for Ansible :)

Ah, wasn't aware of that, apologies!

> I somehow did not notice this, I've fixed it in spec and also opened issue in 
> upstream https://github.com/ansible-collections/ansible.netcommon/issues/116.

Thanks for doing this. I double-checked the files in question and yes,
licensecheck wasn't wrong. There is a little note about possible downstream
re-licensing, though:
> # This code is part of Ansible, but is an independent component.
> # This particular file snippet, and this file snippet only, is BSD licensed.
> # Modules you write using this snippet, which is embedded dynamically by 
> Ansible
> # still belong to the author of the module, and may assign their own license
> # to the complete work.

I re-ran fedora-review. The rpmlint log is clean now:
> Rpmlint
> -------
> Checking: ansible-collection-ansible-netcommon-1.1.2-1.fc33.noarch.rpm
>           ansible-collection-ansible-netcommon-1.1.2-1.fc33.src.rpm
> ansible-collection-ansible-netcommon.src: W: unexpanded-macro URL 
> %{ansible_collection_url}
> ansible-collection-ansible-netcommon.src: W: invalid-url URL 
> %{ansible_collection_url}
> 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Package approved!


-- 
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]

Reply via email to