From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (fed1rmmtao01.cox.net [68.230.241.38]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j216ewoq029119 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:40:59 GMT Received: from eagle.creatures ([68.98.17.33]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050301064046.IXVN9923.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@eagle.creatures>; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 01:40:46 -0500 Received: from [192.168.99.11] (cheetah.creatures [192.168.99.11]) by eagle.creatures (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F9D227079; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 00:06:52 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <42240F71.8010001@cox.net> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:45:05 -0700 From: "D. Wokan" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Is anyone a prude? References: <20050226204457.0bfad52d@snowdrop> <20050227212828.37717.qmail@web50407.mail.yahoo.com> <20050227215917.GB17631@dst.grantgoodyear.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 27bebd5b-0224-445a-a022-92f2b879ba33 X-Archives-Hash: 1a209dd1983df9c5b371a2840f08a57b Lina Pezzella wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > This thread brings up a very good point. There are little children > using our distribution, and they should not be exposed to dirty words > such as the one being disputed in this thread. There are other > packages that are also questionable too. "BitchX" comes to mind, and > "Evolution" is on the top of my die-package-die list. We certainly > wouldn't want little children asking about that, now would we? > > In light of the above, I suggest that in the interest of being sure > not to offend anyone, we remove the three aforementioned packages and > any others that might be offensive. It's not censorship, it's decency. > > Lina Pezzella > Ebuild/Porting Co-Lead > Gentoo for Mac OS X > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin) > > iD8DBQFCIlO+NJ9STR9DbYERAnGEAJ9UWVhMZts3KBmDe92IPvhEnv9zJACfds4y > 5xZic+UOXcdVDJBgUx2IbEs= > =o0qW > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list What you are suggesting is considered a slippery slope. If you remove any packages based on the beliefs of a few, you'll eventually have to remove a few more as others with different beliefs show up and announce their offense. This will go on until our genetically modified crops start using the Internet and announce that they're offended by the word kernel on behalf of their corn brethren and there goes your entire OS. The only way I could see around this would be to have the mirroring system be given a list of potentially offensive names and have the sync only grab them if the admins set the system to allow such packages. (Of course, some parents will still bitchx because their brainfucked kids edited the setting and we'll end up having to install credit card # generators so we can put in a sequence of digits that supposedly prove we're adults to authorize the downloads instead. The more ambitious will just write one themselves, as the LUN formula isn't that hard a concept to follow.) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list