[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: dopewars do we need such a game in debian distribution?

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:49:26AM -0500, Matthew K Poer wrote:
> I do feel like a prude for saying it, but I was pretty taken aback when
> I saw this in the repository for the first time. But, I can respect that
> Debian has one of the largest repos of any gnu/linux distribution, and I
> think that it is Debian's job to have as many stable packages to offer
> users as possible - not to filter out what some people may find
> inappropriate or inferior (if that were the case - the KDE/GNOME debates
> and browser flame wars would have destroyed us).

Exactly.  People can package anything they want and write anything they
want.  I don't have to install it if I don't like it after all.  The
only qualifications for inclusion should be technical ones, not ethical
ones.  If it qualifies under the DFSG and someone is interested in
maintaining the package properly, then it should be able to go in.

> That said, I can't say I have much respect for those who wrote, ported,
> package, or play this game. It's just dumb.

I will agree with that.

> So I don't like it it, but I don't think it should be removed from the
> repositories. Good sysadmins will make sure not to install something
> like this on a work or family machine, which is easy enough (the way
> apt* and any package manager works, the sysadmin must manually and
> specifically select such a package).
> And I don't expect Debian will start pushing dopewars down the throats
> of those who don't want it any sooner than they push IceWeasel on Konqi
> fanboys or Blackbox on the Fluxbox fanboys.

Yep, a base install really doesn't include much at all.

Now why Desktop task implies gnome and not kde or fluxbox or whatever I
have no idea, but I don't really care either.  I can install whatever I
want and use it since it's all packaged nicely.

Len Sorensen

Reply to: