https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2427954
--- Comment #5 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #4) > OMG, this one is huge. Are you sure you do not want to split it even more? > > > LicenseRef-gfl > > LicenseRef-Collection No, because then I'm inventing arbitrary splits that don't reflect upstream. > Not a valid license string. Note they occur several times in the spec file. I love upstream TeXLive and their approach to licensing. LOVE. The GUST Font License is just the LPPL. Upstream sometimes calls it "gfl" or "gfsl". My tooling now properly catches and handles both cases. New SPEC: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/tl2025/texlive-collection-fontsextra.spec New SRPM: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/tl2025/texlive-collection-fontsextra-svn77044-2.fc44.src.rpm Fixes incorrect license strings and adds the AppData validation: -- 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=2427954 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202427954%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
