Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 09:54:12 -0500, Stephen Frost <email@example.com> said:
> * John Goerzen (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 12:28:20PM -0200, Fernanda Giroleti Weiden wrote:
>> > "It is also the type of discussion that deterred me from becoming
>> > involved in Debian for some time."
>> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-women/2004/12/msg00011.html
>> If our goal is to advance the cause of a Free operating system,
>> then why should we be including, in our OPERATING SYSTEM, images
>> that serve no useful purpose, and instead alienate millions or
>> billions of people worldwide? How does this advance our stated
>> priorities: our users and Free Software? Does anyone seriously
>> think that we are being a disservice to users because we don't have
>> porn integrated into the operating system? Does anyone seriously
>> think that including these particular images would be such an
>> overwhelming benefit?
> I agree with this and is why I was suggesting that someone draft up
> some language which outlines, for the benefit of our users, things
> they're not likely to find in Debian. I suppose that might end up
> being too difficult but I think it'd be good to have some criteria
> for packages to pass in order to be accepted which includes issues
> like these and is clear enough that our users understand it.
a) legal to distribute
b) meets the dfsg
c) scratches an itch you feel, and something you are willing to sign
up to maintain and keep bug free.
Never trust anyone who says money is no object.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C