Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm?
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 11:04:05PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 10:45:15PM +0100, Michael Neuffer wrote:
> > On 11/20/22 22:14, Roberto A. Foglietta wrote:
> > > On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 21:42, G. Branden Robinson
> > > <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you for, perhaps inadvertently, compelling me to review some of
> > > > the content of the package. I can now say that I am certain there is
> > > > material of worth in the fortunes-off package and support its retention
> > > > in the Debian distribution. A review process for individual entries
> > > > that are incompatible with the project's values is manifest in the BTS.
> > > >
> > > rational approach vs cancel culture: 1 vs 0
> > > <3
> >
> > I can only very much agree to this.
>
> I also wholly agree, alas it seems we already lost before this even
> started :(
>
> https://tracker.debian.org/news/1385116/accepted-fortune-mod-11991-72-source-amd64-all-into-unstable/
Thanks $maintainer for not engaging in such an intellectual entertainment, and
for quietly doing the right thing here.
--
Tiago
Reply to: