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

Re: displeasing package names

On Nov 17, Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de> wrote:

> Brainfuck is a known programming language but that
> should not make any difference here from the debian
> perspective. So "fuck" also occurs in other names and/or
> package descriptions (here its not even "fuck") as a part of a name
> but its not in any description or stands as
> a single word.
So maybe the problem is not "fuck" but 1337-speech.

> I don't really care if w3bfukk0r makes it into the archive
> or not but I propose to make a statement about package names
> in the policy if they can be a reason for a reject.
> Opinions?
Too hard for too little gain. It's the ftpmasters call anyway.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: