https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235768

Jonathan S. <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai
                   |                            |lplus.org)



--- Comment #5 from Jonathan S. <[email protected]> ---
Honestly, I'm fine with not installing the license files at all if the
Licenses: tag is enough. In general, I see very little point in having 1000s of
copies of the same licenses in /usr/share/licenses. However, it seems that
Fedora wants it this way: One file per package. Wouldn't adding such a
-licenses package defeat the point of having /usr/share/licenses/libobjfw as
well as /usr/share/licenses/ofhttp? I guess the entire idea is that you can
just take the package name and get to the license, right?

What about the other points?


-- 
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=2235768

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202235768%23c5
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to