Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499069
--- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com 2009-05-05 01:56:22 EDT --- The License should be GPLv2+ at least or maybe even GPLv3.
Not sure if ghc-rpm-macros should not require ghc - macros.ghc is not really useful without it. On the other hand any package that uses the macros will also need to BR ghc I guess anyway, but still it does not seem unreasonable to require ghc in my opinion.
Otherwise looks fine to me.
haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org