https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2184237
--- Comment #8 from Miro Hrončok <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Maxwell G from comment #4) > > The "# Ineligble for upstreaming" comment might benefit form more > > rationale/reason. Although I have not seen if the commit message sin the > > patches don't already do that. > > You can see the specfile and patches in > https://git.sr.ht/~gotmax23/fedora-python-orjson/tree if that's easier than > unpacking the SRPM. I think the messages in the patches themselves (they're > git formatted patches) explain/justify the patches, but let me know if > anything in particular needs to be clarified. Thanks, being able to clickity-click to the patches thought the web-browser indeed makes it easier. Will check the messages. > > What is the purpose of the outmost parenthesis here? "((Apache-2.0 OR MIT) > > AND BSD-3-Clause)" ? Should the License be flattened to: "(Apache-2.0 OR > > MIT) AND (Apache-2.0 OR BSL-1.0) AND AND BSD-3-Clause AND Apache-2.0"? > > "(Apache-2.0 OR MIT) AND BSD-3-Clause" is the license of encoding_rs. I'd > prefer not to preform effective licensing analysis/flattening if the > License: value is still reasonable without it. This did not seem like a case of "effective licensing" to me, so I asked: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/F4MYD7U6D2ROAL3CAOHSYDL3H6TPWZOT/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2184237 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
