On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 13:26, Eric Lavarde wrote: > Hi again, > > perhaps to bring down the conversation to something more constructive, I > think we should base decision to have something or not in Debian: > 1. _NOT_ on personal belief (else we would probably end with nothing). Agreed. > 2. _NOT_ on local laws (same comment). Disagreed. If Debian is illegal to distribute to some important section of people in the world, because we include strange noncritical bits of software (hotbabe, the bible), then we have a real problem. > 3. does it have some "technical" interest? (technical documentation is > OK, technical tool to show/use the Bible is OK, Bible in HTML format is > probably _not_ OK, Gutenberg can do it better). In which case the bible tool should probably offer to automatically download the bible for local use; the int-fiction installer package works this way, for instance. > 4. does it respect basic democratic values? This conflicts with 1). Basic democratic values are a personal belief. I don't agree with values often labeled "democratic" here in the US. Other developers may not agree with any democratic values (and we all know who I'm talking about). > 5. does it respect other people's belief and personallity? This conflicts with 1) and 4). The right to offend someone is important. > Personally, I find Bellamy's pictures quite artistic and not aggressive, > but I would say, Women on the list should decide on this one (criteria 5). Whoa, huh? A little sexist here. If we pick packages by (essentially) popular vote, why don't men get to weigh in their opinion, too? And what about transgendered/nongendered/intersexed people? The only valuable criteria are #2 and #3; #2 tells us if we shouldn't include it, and #3 if we should. With both of them, we have a pretty good check for whether or not something should be in Debian. -- Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part