On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:02:23AM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>On 05/29/2009 02:10 AM, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
>>>The problem with a comps group is that it will lead to having a group
>>>in graphical installers
>>
>>although in ojuba we use ourown comps files, but this is a catastrophe
>>because they are merged!
>>I guess there is an option for hidden groups
>>
>
>Have these packages:
>
>Provides: policy(adult content)
>
>And have a package that's mandatory in your respin that has:
>
>Conflicts: policy(adult content)
>
>/me taking one of the good ideas from the flag debate.
Except it is obvious that something contains a flag or not.
Labeling certain content 'questionable' is going to end up being all over
the distro and diluting the value of the tag.
Let me put it this way - if we start randomly rating things in a provides
tag and gnaughty or hot-babe or pr0n-comfort get labeled this way then
I'll make sure I personally add the same tag to:
- firefox
- yum
- sword
- gnome-sword
And every email client, because I'm spammed by countless messages
offering adult content every day :-(
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o-
http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org -o-
http://ovirt.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|