https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1980482
Otto Urpelainen <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?([email protected]) |needinfo?([email protected]) --- Comment #2 from Otto Urpelainen <[email protected]> --- Thank you for the review. I have fixed the issues. New specfile: http://oturpe.kapsi.fi/fedora/rpms/mt32emu/2/mt32emu.spec New srpm: http://oturpe.kapsi.fi/fedora/rpms/mt32emu/2/mt32emu-2.5.2-1.fc34.src.rpm (In reply to Christopher Engelhard from comment #1) > Issues: > ======= > - (MUST) The GPL license in COPYING doesn't actually apply to any code > included in this package, so I don't think it should be included in > %license Makes sense, removing during %install. I also contacted upstream about removing the file from there also. There is a different but also sensible argument for keeping it, thus the file stays upstream. Refer to: https://github.com/munt/munt/issues/68#issuecomment-882524417 > - (SHOULD) Upstream appears to have just released version 2.5.2 > https://github.com/munt/munt/releases/tag/libmt32emu_2_5_2 Nice, updated to latest version. > [!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. > **** MIT License text is added via patch, with bug filed upstream. This > is OK **** Version 2.5.2 has the MIT license text, so I was able to remove the patch. -- 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] Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
