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=615153
--- Comment #6 from Germán Racca <gracca(a)gmail.com> 2010-07-17 18:03:37 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Hello Ankur:
Yes. I think that would be better.
Well...I'm not sure right now if it is better to package them separately,
because this version of tint2 has a config tool, called tint2conf, which once
opened it uses tintwizard.py to configure the theme.
But coming back to the license issue...is it not allowed to use a combination
of 2 licenses in a single package? Could you please clarify this to me? Because
in [1] says we can. If this is the case, I can package tint2 and tintwizard.py
together without any problem.
[
1]https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_L...
It still shouldn't call it a binary AFAIK. It's a python
script. Although I may
be wrong. I'd suggest asking upstream to make up a man page for tintwizard and
include it in the distribution too.
Certainly I could suggest upstream to add a man page for tintwizard.py, but I
don't think it is essential here because it is only a warning and to write a
man page could take a long time...
Ankur, again many thanks for your time, and I would like you to clarify my
doubts in order to go on with this package.
Regards,
German.
--
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.