On 05/29/2009 08:03 AM, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
as I said I don't want you to tag them I want you to limit the
list
for me from more than 10,000 package which increases at arbitrary time
to tens of packages on a wiki that I can //watch// (a feature of the wiki)
and regarding to your examples provided that they are already accepted in fedora
<<EOQ
In some places a game with people firing at other people with red blood
coming out and all is considered strongly violent, but firing at aliens
with abstract shapes that have green blood not so much, for others
firing at anything is considered violent, what definition do you use ?
EOQ
it's not important what is my definition
the important thing is to have a place for those who care to look at
and decide, yes different people will have different definitions so
what ? if a package is placed in that wiki page this does not mean
it's tagged banned or whatever
it means that it might be inappropriate for some poeple
it's the job for those who care to check this list and take their own
subset from it according to their own definition.
Well... If you're going to argue along those lines then I'd also argue
that it's up to those who care about restricting the package set to
maintain the list. Because having package maintainers identify what
might potentially be offensive to people in cultures widely removed from
themselves and adding them to a non-binding, out-of-spec file list on
the wiki is going to break down on so many levels.
If you want better tools to help the people who care about different
sorts of offensive content maintain and generate such a list, we have
something to talk about. But having "add something to a wiki list"
become a Packaging Guideline is something I'll vote against. We're
trying to move things like this (for instance, the retired package list)
off of the wiki, not add more to it.
-Toshio