https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2115066
Otto Liljalaakso otto.liljalaakso@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(vpvainio@iki.fi)
--- Comment #8 from Otto Liljalaakso otto.liljalaakso@iki.fi --- (In reply to Ville-Pekka Vainio from comment #7)
What are your plans with regard to the licence headers?
I was thinking of just waiting until there is a new release, and let them trickle to Fedora on version bump. In my opinion licensing is clear even without them, and there is no rule in Fedora requiring them to be present, so I do not see this as an urgent matter. However, if you prefer, I can add upstream commit as a patch.
The package is already looking good. I'd prefer if the wget Requires was just "wget". I think it might speed up dependency resolution a bit, but I'm not sure.
Changed.
Other than that I'd be ready to accept the package.
Specfile: http://oturpe.kapsi.fi/fedora/rpms/yle-dl/20220704/3/yle-dl.spec SRPM: http://oturpe.kapsi.fi/fedora/rpms/yle-dl/20220704/3/yle-dl-20220704-3.fc37....
I am also planning to switch the package to rpmautospec once imported to dist-git. FESCo recently notified that they are planning to recommend it for all packages. That notification has prompted me to try it again, but I had already started with packaging yle-dl. Switching in middle of review felt quite messy, and also, apparently, dist-git import tooling also has a bug with --no-initial-commit, which makes is difficult to directly import rpmautospec packages.