On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 10:37:18PM -0600, Scott Dier wrote: > Since at least one person has off-handedly suggested that an elected > official, such as the DPL, should handle package content disputes, I > bring this question. > > Do you feel the DPL should be involved in these sorts of things? Only as a last resort. > Do you feel that 'offensive' package content should be handled by > another elected offical of some sort? No, I don't believe we need a Ministry of Truth. > And, optionally, do you have an opinion on how 'offensive' package > content should be handled? I believe package content in this respect should be left to the maintainer's discretion, which should include a healthy respect for a deference to the integrity of the upstream source. I also think that the only acceptable place for gatekeeping is at the user level. That means not uploading a package that Conflicts with another because the latter has the "F-word" in it. Those who want to embark on bowdlerization projects should probably host their efforts from a different site. I can envision a "grep-package" tool that could be generally useful, and which could pull down pattern and rule sets from URL's. Written with a sufficiently broad intent, this could enable far more, and far nobler things, than just censorship. -- G. Branden Robinson | Psychology is really biology. Debian GNU/Linux | Biology is really chemistry. email@example.com | Chemistry is really physics. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | Physics is really math.
Description: PGP signature