| |
@@ -75,12 +75,12 @@
|
| |
|
| |
The `License:` field refers to the licenses of the contents of the *_binary_* rpm.
|
| |
|
| |
- This policy and examples can be found at xref:legal::license-field.adoc/[License: field in spec file].
|
| |
+ This policy and examples can be found at xref:legal::license-field.adoc[License: field in spec file].
|
| |
|
| |
=== Valid License Short Names
|
| |
|
| |
The `+License:+` field for new packages as of July 2022 must be filled with the appropriate SPDX license identifier or
|
| |
- expression from the list of xref:legal::allowed-licenses.adoc/[allowed licenses] for Fedora.
|
| |
+ expression from the list of xref:legal::allowed-licenses.adoc[allowed licenses] for Fedora.
|
| |
Note that some licenses may be allowed for only certain types of material, e.g., fonts, content, or documentation.
|
| |
|
| |
The https://spdx.org/licenses/[SPDX License List] provides identifiers for each individual license
|
| |
@@ -88,12 +88,12 @@
|
| |
SPDX license expressions cover situations where multiple licenses apply to a package, where there is a choice
|
| |
of a license, and where licenses are coupled with exceptions or additional permissions.
|
| |
|
| |
- xref:legal::license-field.adoc/[License: field in Spec file] contains examples
|
| |
+ xref:legal::license-field.adoc[License: field in Spec file] contains examples
|
| |
and further explanations for using SPDX expressions in the `License:` field.
|
| |
|
| |
For more information on what to do if you find a license that is not on the Fedora list,
|
| |
does not have a corresponding SPDX license identifier or expression, or other process questions,
|
| |
- see xref:legal::license-review-process.adoc/[License Review Process].
|
| |
+ see xref:legal::license-review-process.adoc[License Review Process].
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
maybe the third time is a charm...
Signed-off-by: Jilayne Lovejoy