[Fedora-packaging] License landscape (and question of best pratice)
Tom 'spot' Callaway
tcallawa at redhat.com
Tue Mar 7 15:40:50 UTC 2006
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 15:26 +0000, Jose' Matos wrote:
> 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? ;)
Sounds like a good idea. :)
~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!
More information about the packaging
mailing list