https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401335
--- Comment #1 from Athos Ribeiro <athoscribe...@gmail.com> --- Hi Miro, Since the package license is BSD, the license text must be present in the package, according to [1]. Will you check that with upstream and ask them to include it in the package? What is your opinion on having a -doc subpackage for the documentation here, since it is large, considering the package size? [2] Also, do you have any comments on the .so file shipped? I noticed that there are some other python packages that will not run ldconfig whenever they own so files (which are also unversioned) [3] [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries -- 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 -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
