Re: Bug#354831: ITP: bfc -- Brainfuck compiler
(I'm not on -devel, so I constructed this reply by hand.)
> And given the reaction to porn-get and bitchx and
> whatever-the-stripping-cpu-monitor-was-called , I tend to assume[2] that
> the true intent of such an ITP is to instigate yet another 500 post
> flame war between the "but what about the children" crew and the "you
> can't censor me!" crew. It's all just so damn tiresome.
I only saw the last one of the flame wars you mention, and it didn't
even cross my mind that this ITP would gather similar attention. I've
had this software packaged for many years, but I'm not a DD, and the ITP
was only to follow the protocol of finding sponsors for the package.
Besides, brainfuck is already present in the archive to a varying
degree, so I didn't think this package would be somehow special. Note
that the package name does not have any controversial words.
Besides: if it's tiresome to argue about indecent words, is the
solution, then, not to use them, or not to complain about using them?
Or not to complain about the arguments? (I know this is flamebait,
sorry, but these things just seem to be impossible to reach an agreement
upon.)
Panu
--
personal contact: panu.kalliokoski@helsinki.fi, +35841 5323835
technical contact: atehwa@iki.fi, http://www.iki.fi/atehwa/
PGP fingerprint: 0EA5 9D33 6590 FFD4 921C 5A5F BE85 08F1 3169 70EC
Reply to: