On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 14:38 +0200, Denis Leroy wrote:
On 05/19/2009 12:39 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> I don't much like the reasons that we have to do it -- but I do agree
> that it's best just to stay out of the political debate by not shipping
> _any_ flags.
Will you also stay out of the profanity debate and blacklist all
packages contains any textual occurrence of a profane word ? Or ship
them in a separate "-adult" subpackage ? This is completely ridiculous,
and the fact you are a member of FeSCO is plain scary. This can only be
excused by lack of time and/or interest to think about a better solution.
I believe we do remove profanity where it's visible to the user, such as
in fortune files. We also removed the 'random image' screensaver, didn't
we?
I don't really _approve_ of those changes, just as I don't really
approve of removing flags. But it's not that I disagree with the Fedora
decision -- it's more that I disagree with the screwed-up society which
makes it necessary. I do reluctantly concede that it's the most
appropriate decision for Fedora. As did an overwhelming majority of my
colleagues on FESCo, iirc.
Worst of all, this "policy" is forced on us, without any
sort of valid
legal reason for it, or even chance for discussion on the mailing list.
I'm sorry if that impression was given. I thought we actually postponed
the discussion and vote on it for a week so that it could get more
visibility -- do I misremember that?
And my understanding is that there _is_ a valid legal reason for it.
Distributing Fedora in some countries is _illegal_ if it contains
certain flags, and can lead to extremely uncomfortable repercussions.
--
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse(a)intel.com Intel Corporation