Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708934
--- Comment #6 from Marcela Mašláňová <mmaslano(a)redhat.com> 2011-05-31 07:35:47 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > > Imho in license should be postgresql instead of BSD.
> >
> > I have explicitly asked upstream about versions and they state that the
content
> > of BSD file is wrong, but the BSD license is correct. The upstream issue is
> > referenced in .spec file, so I think we should be OK.
> >
> From your comment (License is not that clear) isn't clear, that you have
> statement from upstream. Sometimes is in specfile included email, where was
> license claimed.
I would expect that reviewer could click on the link on the same line to see
what is going on, but my expectations might be overly high.
The link could be gone, but the package could still life in some old release.
License must be stated clearly.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.