https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095717
--- Comment #5 from Ian McInerney <ian.s.mcinerney(a)ieee.org> ---
Legal has determined this package is just the LGPLv2+ (the additional language
is apparently less strict than the language of the LGPL, so the LGPL would take
precedence anyway), so that is the license identifier to use.
But only a new automake run and release will make the distribution
tarball contain the file. Should I simply ship the file as an additional
"source" for now?
Yes, you can just ship the LICENSE_LGPL as a new source: line and do the
install that way, and you should probably leave a comment/link to the upstream
PR noting that it can be removed after the next version is released and the
in-tree version could be used.
I have the spec file for 1.4.0-2 pending (unless you prefer to
accumulate everything into 1.4.0-1, which is fine for me).
Please update it into a -2 spec and post it again. I think it will be good to
go after that one.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095717