Re: CoC policy for package contents (was: Re: Can the community team remove packages or kick me out for not removing packages?)
Hi Salvo,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 02:27:27PM +0200, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think there should be an entirely new and different policy to what
> to accept and not accept in debian.
Indeed, that's the fourth option in the list that I suggested.
> Code is mostly not written in debian and most projects adopt different
> code of conducts, so there will inevitably be a lot of mismatches if
> we just apply the code of conduct to all the code we have.
Hence my suggestion that the rules should not apply to upstream comments
or variable names etc.
We can certainly patch software which performs actions that would be
counter to any standard we set for the software we distribute. We
already do set various requirements, such as for example the location of
configuration files, that may require patching upstream software. This
would just be one more case where we do that.
> Also, data doesn't have a conduct, so there's that…
No, but the people who *write* the data do.
> I think that before starting to draft voting options, it would be
> better to have an informal poll to see where people stand on various
> issues.
Informal polls are part of our GR drafting process. You need a number of
seconds before a ballot option can make it on the ballot; that in itself
is an informal form of a poll. So I don't see the need, really.
I understand you not wanting to be rushed into putting something on the
ballot when you're not ready for it yet. For that reason, I *explicitly*
said I'd hold off on proposing a GR if the discussion is still in full
swing. I'm also happy to hold off if someone informs me that they are
drafting another option but they're not ready for it to be added yet.
But none of that means we can't say that we want a GR on the subject?
> For example:
>
> Are religious texts exempt?
I think they should be, but not because they are "religious". Instead,
they should be excempt because (a) there is a reasonable use for them in
the archive, (b) they have been read by people for a very very *very*
long time, in unmodified form, and (c) the authorship is clear[1] and not
in any way or form associated with Debian.
Yes, that definition *also* applies to Mein Kampf. Is that a problem?
Maybe. I haven't yet decided.
[1] well, okay, perhaps the authorship is not clear, as in, we don't
really always know who wrote each part of the bible, but it's
"clear" as in, people won't complain to Debian about the authorship
of the bible.
> I think they should not be because next
> thing that will happen is that a few people will come up and say mein
> kampf is a religious text for them, but it seems clear that some
> people believe religious texts are exempt. In that case we should also
> define what a religion is and isn't.
So by not looking at this from the side of "religion" vs "not religion",
we neatly sidestep this whole tangled mess. I didn't mention the word
"religion" in my previous mail. This was not an accident.
> Are sufficiently old things allowed? Every single greek person who
> wrote anything, most likely would be in jail nowadays, but their
> conduct was in most cases accepted in their own culture. Does this
> only apply to sufficiently old things or also modern?
I would say that sufficiently old things are allowed, yes.
I think an untranslated version of the Illiad should be allowed,
unmodified, even though it basically treats women as property.
I think the Illiad, translated by a university professor specializing in
ancient Greek and peer reviewed by a number of his colleagues should be
allowed, unmodified.
I think the Illiad, translated long enough ago that people could comment
on it and complain if there are bad parts in the translation should be
allowed, unmodified.
I think the Illiad, translated by someone who did it on a whim one
sunday evening and who decides to publish it through Debian for the
first time should probably be eyed with suspicion, at least.
These are obviously just examples. In general, I don't think the Illiad
should be distributed through Debian because the Illiad is a text and
not a piece of software. But let's ignore that, for the sake of
argument.
> In general I think that things everybody agrees on who are not
> uncomfortable to anyone are not worth saying, so if that's the goal we
> should be purging anything that isn't software, and possibly most
> games.
>
> There's probably much more to this but I had planned to think about it
> for longer before starting a thread, but you were quicker :)
Please do think about it, and make suggestions! If I agree with them,
I'll incorporate them in my text. If not, you can always make your own
option available.
--
w@uter.{be,co.za}
wouter@{grep.be,fosdem.org,debian.org}
I will have a Tin-Actinium-Potassium mixture, thanks.
Reply to: