Re: [OT] Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:33, Adam McKenna <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 12:37:26PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Tom, your statements don't frighten me. I am merely pointing out that
> > the vast majority of Christians will find them extremely offensive. If
> > you did not hate Christians so much then you would not be raising such
> > issues on this list.
> > PS Why don't you sign your messages with your real name Tom Ballard?
> Speaking as a recovering Catholic, I don't think that Christians will find
> the names "offensive", however they may give some people the wrong idea
> about Debian (namely, that it is run by satanists or something).
You appear to have confused the original discussion (using daemon names for
naming Debian/BSD projects) with the latest twist raised by Tom Ballard
(whether drinking Jesus' semen would be considered offensive to Christians).
> In general, I think a good rule of thumb is that anything that needs to be
> explained shouldn't be used as a name. (Or at least not a high-profile
Unless of course you want to get something that's a unique trade-mark, in
which case the obvious names are all unsuitable.
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page