https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161518
--- Comment #40 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Lumír Balhar from comment #36)
Thanks Fabio. The macros really make that job easier. Do you think
that they
should be mentioned somewhere in the docs?
The implementation of these macros is pretty new, it was only added with the
most recent version of rust2rpm (i.e. v23). I wanted to wait for a bit of
real-world usage to iron out any kinks before documenting them (and their
limitations), but at this point I think they're OK. I'll put documenting them
in the Rust Packaging Guidelines on my TODO list.
Hence, I believe the License tag MUST be:
License: MIT AND (MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND Apache-2.0
According to my understanding of the new Legal Guidelines, yes.
It doesn't make a ton of sense to list them like that (because, as you pointed
out, any combination of these will just result in "MIT AND Apache-2.0"), but
IANAL.
--
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=2161518