SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/libpisp.spec SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/libpisp-1.2.0-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: A helper library to generate run-time configuration for the Raspberry Pi ISP (PiSP), consisting of the Frontend and Backend hardware components. koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=131098324 FAS: pbrobinson Reproducible: Always
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8860655 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2357479-libpisp/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08860655-libpisp/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
The CC0-1.0 license is allowed for content in Fedora, but not-allowed for code. The meson wrap file utils/libpisp.wrap is an ini-style configuration file and can be considered content. I think the meson options configuration file meson_options.txt should also be considered content. On the other hand, meson is a (domain-specific, limited) programming language, so I think all of the meson.build files should be considered code. The versioning script utils/version.py is certainly code. Even though these are all build-system files that do not contribute to the licenses of the binary RPMs, CC0-1.0 code cannot be included in source RPMs, either. For utils/version.py, you could upload a “filtered” source archive to the lookaside cache with the problematic file removed. For the meson.build files, this is not an option, because you need them to build the libary. The only possibilities would seem to be (1) convincing upstream to relicense the files, or (2) convincing Fedora Legal that a usage exception (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-field/#_usage_exceptions) should apply in this case.