http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391
--- Comment #14 from Orcan Ogetbil <[email protected]> 2009-06-05 04:38:07 --- (In reply to comment #13) > > I don't like at all this dirty hack : > echo "include COPYING" >> MANIFEST.in > > Packager including a license is totally wrong, you don't have right to do > that. > If you want a source archive to bundle a license, you can send a patch > upstream > asking to do that. But you are not allowed to do that yourself. > I totally agree with you on this. However, we had an almost identical situation with the reviews of globus packages, where there was a LICENSE file in the root of the tree and globus-* packages are made from the subbranches. I defended to *not* include the license file but it was decided to manually copy the LICENSE file (which is ASLv2) to each subbranch. For instance, see the source extraction guide in http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/repos/globus/info/new/globus-ftp-control.spec from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478922 The decision was made in the FPC mailing list https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-April/msg00042.html I used echo "include COPYING" >> MANIFEST.in for consistency with that decision. I would gladly remove it if there was no such decision. What do you say about this? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
