On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 07:17:00PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 11. 11. 22 17:24, Sandro wrote: > > I'm not quite sure why pulling in an additional supplemental dependency > > would be considered a breaking change. Is it because rpmlint behaves > > differently with the new license definitions? > > Yes. Suppose I am running a Fedora 36 system with rpmlint installed and I > use it to validate spec files for RHEL 9. When I install > rpmlint-fedora-license-data, a huge bulk of licenses that were not valid > when I started to use Fedora 36 and that are not valid for RHEL 9 are > suddenly valid. > To clarify -- while SPDX license strings are not valid for RHEL 9, are they valid for EPEL 9?
Thanks, -- Michel Alexandre Salim identities: https://keyoxide.org/5dce2e7e9c3b1cffd335c1d78b229d2f7ccc04f2
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
