[Bug 529496] Review Request: libmtag - An advanced C music tagging library with a simple API

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=529496





--- Comment #8 from Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at gmail.com>  2009-11-08 10:52:01 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> 
> > That's the COPYING file, which I already said I'm going to include.
> Then please do so now.

I already said I will. Since I'm doing this on my free time I'll do so at my
earliest convenience.

> In other words: keep your upstream and Fedora packager's role separate.
> I.e. first release a tarball, then package this tarball for Fedora, not vice
> versa.

What's the point of releasing a package that doesn't meet Fedora's standards? I
would need to make another release just after receiving more feedback. I'll
rather wait.

> > The
> > question was about source-code files. In Michael's words: "confirm the
> > licensing in the source files".  
> 
> I can only guess what he meant. My guess would be, he is asking you to add a
> copyright/license disclaimer line to each of the source files.

I don't see anything on the license that *requires* to add copyright/license
disclaimers to each file. It says it's *desirable*, but ultimately an
"upstream" choice.

> However, this also is upstream business.  

Yes, it's "upstream" business, but if it was *only* upstream business, then you
would have accepted this packages already, and you clearly have issues with it
that "upstream" (me) doesn't have strong feelings about.

-- 
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.