[Fedora-packaging] License landscape (and question of best pratice)
Jose' Matos
jamatos at fc.up.pt
Tue Mar 7 15:26:44 UTC 2006
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 14:46, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> I'd say, include DESCRIPTION as %doc, and keep License: as simple as
> possible.
But then we are duplicating that file, since R BUILD command also installs
it.
On the other hand that is a very _descriptive_ file. ;-)
I noticed before that you do the same in your R packages. So we could adopt
this as the standard practice for R packages. Does this looks like a deal? ;)
Thank your for the input. :-)
> ~spot
> --
> Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260
> Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
> Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
> Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
--
José Abílio
More information about the Fedora-packaging
mailing list