Michael Meeks wrote:

Having said that, while I personally agree with the description:

+The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software +package for research and study of God and His Word.

I can see it might offend those whose end up on the other side of that sometimes sharp division ;-) how about:

+The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software +package for research and study of the Bible and associated literature.

Hopefully that is less contentious.

Much better and also more accurate. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.1°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

how about we add to the education and science a philosophy..

I have a small objections to that... both education and science rely on the outcome of the critical thinking process... otherwise I agree with you... -- Without Questions there are no Answers! _____________________________________________________________________ Alin Marin ELENA Advanced Molecular Simulation Research Laboratory School of Physics, University College Dublin ---- Ardionsamblú Móilíneach Saotharlann Taighde Scoil na Fisice, An Coláiste Ollscoile, Baile Átha Cliath ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://alin.elenaworld.net ______________________________________________________________________

On Friday 09 September 2011 12:28:23 Richard Guenther wrote:

On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Sascha Peilicke wrote:

...

Hello everyone,

sr#81625 want's to add 'sword', a bible study tool to openSUSE:Factory. While that is totally fine, the spec file %description contains stuff like:

+The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for +research and study of God and His Word.

While I don't care much for that particular bedtime story, others may well be offended by biased religious views (even more so if their's differing). Of course, this may equally apply to policitcal views or offensive words. As of political - do we have to ban each package that contains the FSF manifest (usually as part of their invariant section in their GFDL docs?) ... Good point, BTW. ;-) -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Sascha Peilicke

On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Joerg Schilling wrote:

Richard Guenther wrote:

...

As of political - do we have to ban each package that contains the FSF manifest (usually as part of their invariant section in their GFDL docs?) ...

Your point of view may depend on the level of "independence" you like to implement and what you like to tolerate. "cdrkit" is e.g. a _result_ of a cruzade against a OSS projekt and thus it seems to be politically incorrect to support it by distributing it - independent of the level of neutrality you like to implement.

If your intention is "Laissez faire", then you may be OK with the FSF manifest.

If you however like to express your independence by disallowing people to use you to advertize for their religious ideas, the FSF manifest seems to be inapropriate.

Yes, that's exactly what needs to be decided. I opt for "Laissez faire" with some extra disambiguation text about openSUSEs stance towards opinions presented via package content in a prominent place. Richard. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 09 Sep 2011 12:29:32 Lars Müller wrote:

Maybe best if one of our English native speakers commnets on this.

I'm an atheist and native English speaker, so I'll chip in on this. Here is the full text of the %description from the Sword package, none of which offends me in the slightest. Why would it? ;) The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for research and study of God and His Word. The SWORD Bible Framework allows easy manipulation of Bible texts, commentaries, lexicons, dictionaries, etc. Many frontends are build using this framework. An installed module set may be shared between any frontend using the framework. This is really fairly innocuous text, there is no proselytising or preaching, it's simple an accurate (so far as I can tell) description of what the package is for/does. I find the name of the software project "Sword" mildly amusing but that's neither here nor there, and is just a personal frivolity. I think it's pretty important that openSUSE, as an _open_ project, strives to ensure people of all faiths, and also anyone from racial, cultural and sexual preference minorities feel comfortable and happy that they can leverage and use our tools. Free software that is beneficial and enriching to their faith, culture, community or lifestyle should be welcomed. I don't think it's reasonable to use any of the openSUSE infrastructure or tools to overtly campaign, push, promote or publicise any specific agenda other than the openSUSE projects goals and guiding principles. I don't see any evidence of this in the Sword package, so there's is no issue to discuss that I can see. Cheers the noo, Graham -- "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." — Christopher Hitchens -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 09 Sep 2011 13:06:06 Sascha Peilicke wrote:

Even if you may not see that in the sword package, it doesn't hurt to clarify the general picture IMO. As Ciarran posted, Fedora seems to forbid religious text, I believe Ubuntu does so too (therefore the Christian edition), so there is an issue to discuss here.

I see your point :) Do you know if Fedora/Ubuntu go into detail about what/why they don't allow in their packaging guidelines? I'd probably be quite interested in their reasoning though I'm not sure I would necessarily agree with their decision; I have strong view points (against) religion but on balance I probably feel much stronger about freedom of expression. However, I agree with your point that "open" shouldn't mean "anything goes". Have we had issues before with overtly provocative packages? If so, how were they dealt with? I think the guiding principles offer sound coverage of the aspects I mentioned of being open and welcoming in diversity, but is there any formal language that states a position on what *shouldn't* be tolerated? Graham -- "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." — Christopher Hitchens -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 09 Sep 2011 09:56:20 Robert Schweikert wrote:

Create a philosophy repo as suggested earlier in the thread and keep it out of factory.

As far as I'm aware the package in question was destined for Education repo. Do you have a problem with this categorisation? -- "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." — Christopher Hitchens -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 09 September 2011 13:57:44 Graham Anderson wrote:

On Friday 09 Sep 2011 13:06:06 Sascha Peilicke wrote:

...

Even if you may not see that in the sword package, it doesn't hurt to clarify the general picture IMO. As Ciarran posted, Fedora seems to forbid religious text, I believe Ubuntu does so too (therefore the Christian edition), so there is an issue to discuss here.

I see your point :)

Do you know if Fedora/Ubuntu go into detail about what/why they don't allow in their packaging guidelines? I'd probably be quite interested in their reasoning though I'm not sure I would necessarily agree with their decision; I have strong view points (against) religion but on balance I probably feel much stronger about freedom of expression. So do I, again, I'm totally fine with the package, I only wanted to know if someone would feel offended or if we should care for wording. Seems like most of us don't mind.

However, I agree with your point that "open" shouldn't mean "anything goes". Have we had issues before with overtly provocative packages? If so, how were they dealt with? As far as I know, license where much more controversial so far than people's views ;-)

I think the guiding principles offer sound coverage of the aspects I mentioned of being open and welcoming in diversity, but is there any formal language that states a position on what *shouldn't* be tolerated?

-- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Sascha Peilicke

On Sun, 2011-09-11 at 19:09 +0100, Administrator wrote:

guiding principles. I can easily think of religious & political texts that I would be very unhappy being associated with (especially some of the interpretations of the texts).

As a user of openSUSE and OBS (openSUSE Build Service) I do *NOT* feel *"associated with"* any package in any repo other than the packages I create or use. Does using my local library imply an endorsement of all context contained therein? Such a notion is silly. I also cannot think of *any* text the packaging of which would bother me in the slightest; to be packaged a text already must exist and it's 'moral quality' in regards to the container is neither here nor there. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Le 09/09/2011 16:00, Kim Leyendecker a écrit : (maybe you should talk to the

maintainer(s) first and explain them your concerns. I´m sure you´ll find a way.)

of course we wont do anything but ask the maintainer and accept or reject then. We wont change anything on the text by ourselve (as far as I understand) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xgxog7_clip-l-ombre-et-la-lumiere-3-bad-pig... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGgv_ZFtV14 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Le 09/09/2011 12:54, Graham Anderson a écrit :

The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for research and study of God and His Word.

who is "God", with no other reference? don't think only as occident people jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xgxog7_clip-l-ombre-et-la-lumiere-3-bad-pig... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGgv_ZFtV14 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Lars Müller wrote:

On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 11:59:40AM +0200, Sascha Peilicke wrote:

...

+The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for +research and study of God and His Word.

Maybe best if one of our English native speakers commnets on this.

As a native English speaker, I do think this is a problem. There are three possible areas of controversy and offence here. Two are easy to change. one is not. 1. "study of God" means that the Christian god is the one and only true god. This is the same as saying all other religions are false. Obviously members of other religions would be justified in taking offense at such a statement. 2. "His Word" means that the Bible is the word of God. This has the same problem as the previous, it is saying that the Christian bible is the legitimate word of god, and by extension that others are wrong. 3. The name "sword" has a violent and aggressive connotation, usually associated with more extreme and evangelical brands of Christianity. I am not longer Christian myself, but when I was a Christian I found the name off-putting. So the name might not only be a problem for non-Christians, but for certain types of Christians as well. However, I think this is a much smaller issue than the description, and is probably not worth making a big deal over. 1 and 2 are easy to fix by simply changing the description to something like: "The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for research and study of the Christian bible and theology." I think that would be neutral and acceptable to me. As an atheist I have no problem with having religous software, the issue is when the openSUSE project has the appearance of endorsing particular religious views or denigrating others. The current description has this appearance, but that is easy to fix. The name is more difficult to fix but in my opinion is not is not a serious enough issue to warrant any action. However, people who have had problems with evangelical Christians in the past, or cultures that have had problems with violence by Christians in the past, may have a more serious issue with the name. So my personal vote would be to change the description to something that does not imply a judgement on the validity of any religious beliefs, while keeping the package. There used to be one or more Muslim prayer plasma widgets offered by KDE:Extra. They don't appear to be there any more. I think the rules should at least be consistent, so if they were removed based on their religious content then Christian software should also not be allowed. On the other hand if they were removed because of a lack of a maintainer or lack of upstream updates then it is irrelevant to the current issue. -Todd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:

2011/9/9 todd rme :

...

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Lars Müller wrote:

...

On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 11:59:40AM +0200, Sascha Peilicke wrote:

...

+The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for +research and study of God and His Word.

Maybe best if one of our English native speakers commnets on this.

As a native English speaker, I do think this is a problem.  There are three possible areas of controversy and offence here.  Two are easy to change. one is not.

Lets be honest here, this is a cultural issue and not a native language issue. In case you are not aware the Bible is the book translated to more languages in the world, which clearly ends up any discussion about languages.

I am well aware of that, but someone asked for a native speaker's opinion of the description, so I provided it. It seemed like a reasonable request since properly interpreting the full meaning of the description might be hard for non-native speakers.

...

1. "study of God" means that the Christian god is the one and only true god.  This is the same as saying all other religions are false. Obviously members of other religions would be justified in taking offense at such a statement.

First misconception: YOU ARE ASSUMING IT'S A ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE.

It isn't an assumption, the Sword project is created and maintained by a Christian organization for use with the Christian bible.

This brings problems, because if you read the email from Sasha, there's no reference to any religion in particular, this to say that:

The original email is irrelevant, the software is what it is.

2. It's contents, our shit here is about serving contents, not judging contents.

Please re-read the original post and the request I was responding to. The issue was with the description, not the contents.

...

2. "His Word" means that the Bible is the word of God.  This has the same problem as the previous, it is saying that the Christian bible is the legitimate word of god, and by extension that others are wrong.

Could you please tell me where in Sasha's email is the word bible or any reference to Christianity? The rule of openSUSE on this issue should be pretty much neutral... We're not a theological community, we're a technology community, it's not our role to decide who God is, the verecity of his words or whatever men tells that are His words. We either serve this package or we don't, we are not in a condition to judge the contents, that's the priviledge that we delegate to users.

The software is designed for the Christian bible by a Christian organization.

...

3. The name "sword" has a violent and aggressive connotation, usually associated with more extreme and evangelical brands of Christianity.

The word SWORD has a high density in any of the three monotheistic religions. In fact in some cases God is metaphored with a Sword that defends the weak and punishes the guilty.

Lets not be radical... a sword is just a gourmet appliance :)

As I said, I do not consider a big deal, but others very well might considering its historical usage and current connotations within a number of Christian sects.

...

I am not longer Christian myself, but when I was a Christian I found the name off-putting.  So the name might not only be a problem for non-Christians, but for certain types of Christians as well.  However, I think this is a much smaller issue than the description, and is probably not worth making a big deal over.

We don't need to discuss people's beliefs...

The discussion had been framed in terms of non-Christains being offended. I was simply pointing out that certain aspects might offend Christians as well.

...

1 and 2 are easy to fix by simply changing the description to something like:

"The SWORD Project is an effort to create an ever expanding software package for research and study of the Christian bible and theology."

You are making a dreadful assumption, Sasha's email doesn't specify religion and can be any of the 3 biggest monotheistic religions. What if you change the description to that and SWORD is about Judaísm. You just offended a lot of people. And even if it is about the bible, we should not change jack on it, because there are quite a few versions of the bible... for example:

Once again, it isn't an assumption, it is the stated goal of the project. Have you looked at their website? I have, I think they are quite explicitly a Christian project.

Who are we to enforce such changes and what cost? Who is the the greatest Theology guy to guide us? Probably no one, so why not leave those issues that are irrelevant to us to the authors ? It's their work, not ours, they should call it and describe as they want... It's not our name that comes there.

I fail to see the relevance, the software appears to support a variety of versions of the Christian bible judging by the website.

...

I think that would be neutral and acceptable to me.  As an atheist I have no problem with having religous software, the issue is when the openSUSE project has the appearance of endorsing particular religious views or denigrating others.  The current description has this appearance, but that is easy to fix.

Neutral brings two options:

1. Serve as any other package 2. Do not serve as any other package that breaks any guideline.

None of such options give us the right to judge the contents, that you can do as your own private thingie, but not as a multi-cultural community, which is what openSUSE is.

I don't recall juding the contents, nor did Sasha. What we were judging was the description of the contents.

...

The name is more difficult to fix but in my opinion is not is not a serious enough issue to warrant any action.  However, people who have had problems with evangelical Christians in the past, or cultures that have had problems with violence by Christians in the past, may have a more serious issue with the name.

Wrong thing to do... None of us who live today has any responsibility on what Roman Catholics did during the Spanish Inquisition, or even on what Christian did during the 1st Cruzade. None of us who live today were victims of it, or commanded/executed such deeds.

You should've been a judge to keep on judging people :)

Who are you to tell people what should and should not offend them?

...

So my personal vote would be to change the description to something that does not imply a judgement on the validity of any religious beliefs, while keeping the package.

All you did in the previous lines was to judge. Maybe you should've started your email with this block of text and forget about the judging. You were the one implying the usage of the word sword (which I will defend it is a gourmet appliance), implying christians in acts of violence... etc etc... where's the neutral non-judging stuff there?

I didn't judge anything. It is a fact that certain Christian sects use the sword imagery in a manner that could cause offence. It is a fact that references to things like the crusades or other acts of violence by Christians in the past have caused offence. You may think that is silly, but that is your judgement.

...

There used to be one or more Muslim prayer plasma widgets offered by KDE:Extra.  They don't appear to be there any more.  I think the rules should at least be consistent, so if they were removed based on their religious content then Christian software should also not be allowed.

Could you please provide physical evidence that such applications have been removed because they were related to Islam? I doubt that as been the reason... What I see packaged dropped is often related to lack of maintainers or no longer updated upstream. You are making a very serious accusation, and I strongly recommend that you provide substancial evidance that they were removed because they were related to Islam, if that is true, than all I can say is that we might be considering to enforce the same policy applied to Sirko Kemter to those who made such decisions because deep in the end we are a multi-cultural community and as such we can't do that kind of bullying based on people's beliefs. It's just not civilized.

...

On the other hand if they were removed because of a lack of a maintainer or lack of upstream updates then it is irrelevant to the current issue.

No, it makes all relevance. If they disappeared because they had no maintainer or not updated, that's one thing, if someone removed them because they were related to be connected to Islam as you implied above, it's really something very serious. That is called discrimination, it's pure plain prejudice and prejudice is far worst than bullying. So my stance is to prejudice is to apply the same rules applied to bullies, ejector seat.

I was not imply anything. I was not accusing anyone of removing it based on religious reasons. I figured it was possible that some people are under the impression that openSUSE has a prohibition against religious software while others do not. To me part of the importance of this discussion is to clarify these policies so everyone knows what should and should not be available. If something was removed based on the misunderstanding that religious content was not allowed, it should be rectified. I was not suggesting a specific anti-muslim bias, but rather a lack of clarity on the rules regarding the subject of religion. You really seem intent to read the absolute worst into everything I write. I was doing my best to provide a fair and neutral assessment of the situation and point out potential issues that some people might not be aware of. All of the implications and judgements you are accusing me of are in your own imagination. Please calm down and try to assume good faith on the part of others. -Todd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On 09/09/2011 05:54 PM, Alin Marin Elena wrote:

this kind of answers the question

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines#Legal

I suspect some admin should reach for rdelete... as a breach of the rules.

Content should not be offensive, discriminatory, or derogatory. If you are not sure if a piece of content is one of these things, it probably is. Some examples of content which is permissable:

Some examples of content which are not permissible:

..... Religious texts .....

looks perfectly clear to me...case closed. unless folks want to change the rule. -- dd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Fri 09 Sep 2011 19:10:33 Juergen Weigert wrote:

On Sep 09, 11 18:49:10 +0200, DenverD wrote:

...

...

Some examples of content which are not permissible:

..... Religious texts .....

looks perfectly clear to me...case closed. unless folks want to change the rule.

I understand that this is a software for manipulating bible texts. But the texts themselves are not part of the package. Are they?

cheers, JW-

here it is S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | Repository --+--------------------------------+------------+------------+--------+---------------------------------- | libsword-1_6_2 | package | 1.6.2-1.28 | x86_64 | openSUSE BuildService - Education | libsword-1_6_2 | package | 1.6.2-1.28 | i586 | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword | package | 1.6.2-1.28 | x86_64 | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword | package | 1.6.2-1.28 | i586 | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword | srcpackage | 1.6.2-1.28 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-cs-czebkr1613 | package | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-cs-czebkr1613 | srcpackage | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-da-dan1931 | package | 2.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-da-dan1931 | srcpackage | 2.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gerelb1871 | package | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gerelb1871 | srcpackage | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gerelb1905 | package | 1.4-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gerelb1905 | srcpackage | 1.4-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gerlut1545 | package | 1.2-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gerlut1545 | srcpackage | 1.2-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gersch1951 | package | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-de-gersch1951 | srcpackage | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-en-asv1901 | package | 1.3-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-en-asv1901 | srcpackage | 1.3-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-en-esv2001 | package | 1.0-2.11 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-en-esv2001 | srcpackage | 1.0-2.11 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-es-sparv1909 | package | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-es-sparv1909 | srcpackage | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-fi-finbiblia1776 | package | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-fi-finbiblia1776 | srcpackage | 1.1-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-fr-frelsg1910 | package | 1.3-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-fr-frelsg1910 | srcpackage | 1.3-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-it-itadio1649 | package | 1.0-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-it-itadio1649 | srcpackage | 1.0-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-ru-rst1876 | package | 1.6-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-bible-ru-rst1876 | srcpackage | 1.6-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-commentary-de-mak2002 | package | 1.0-2.11 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-commentary-de-mak2002 | srcpackage | 1.0-2.11 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-commentary-de-rieger2000 | package | 1.0-2.11 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-commentary-de-rieger2000 | srcpackage | 1.0-2.11 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-commentary-en-luther2002 | package | 1.0-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-commentary-en-luther2002 | srcpackage | 1.0-2.10 | noarch | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-devel | package | 1.6.2-1.28 | x86_64 | openSUSE BuildService - Education | sword-devel | package | 1.6.2-1.28 | i586 | openSUSE BuildService - Education looks to me like pretty obvious... Alin -- Without Questions there are no Answers! _____________________________________________________________________ Alin Marin ELENA Advanced Molecular Simulation Research Laboratory School of Physics, University College Dublin ---- Ardionsamblú Móilíneach Saotharlann Taighde Scoil na Fisice, An Coláiste Ollscoile, Baile Átha Cliath ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://alin.elenaworld.net ______________________________________________________________________

On Freitag 09 September 2011 19:10:33 Juergen Weigert wrote:

On Sep 09, 11 18:49:10 +0200, DenverD wrote:

...

...

Some examples of content which are not permissible:

..... Religious texts .....

looks perfectly clear to me...case closed. unless folks want to change the rule.

I understand that this is a software for manipulating bible texts. But the texts themselves are not part of the package. Are they?

The content of /usr/share/doc/packages/sword/AUTHORS is: “Many individuals have contributed so much time and effort, but may God receive all the credit and glory.” Oh, a few last words in what is hopefully my really last mail: I see now that a few of my words may indeed been insensitive. I apologize. I should've used the proper medical and thus 100% neutral terms to describe grown up people who believe in and talk to beings nobody else can see or hear. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

...

...

this kind of answers the question

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines#Legal

I suspect some admin should reach for rdelete... as a breach of the rules.

Content should not be offensive, discriminatory, or derogatory. If you are not sure if a piece of content is one of these things, it probably is. Some examples of content which is permissable:

Some examples of content which are not permissible:

..... Religious texts .....

looks perfectly clear to me...case closed.

unless folks want to change the rule.

while discussing rule change, consider including (alongside SWORD) the "Qur'an For Linux" http://zekr.org/..

and, ponder those devs renaming and adopting a logo historically relevant like the Crusader's sword http://www.crosswire.org/sword/index.jsp...(i doubt it but) maybe zekr.org will change to a more eye-catching Scimitar, Jambiya, or Boeing 7X7 ??

if the rule changes, would openSUSE have to allow the packages of other religions, major and minor?

I agree that we (OS) should not carry religious texts in the packages. I don't know if the rules prevent people creating & maintaining a repository with these texts, but can't see any reason why we'd prevent that. Perhaps if the religions could agree internally and with each other about the acceptable and valid texts then we should reconsider. The first step is to create an agreed list of the valid religions and the variants which are correct. Any offers (not on list please)? David -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On 09/10/2011 05:49 AM, Administrator wrote:

...

...

...

this kind of answers the question

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines#Legal

I suspect some admin should reach for rdelete... as a breach of the rules.

Content should not be offensive, discriminatory, or derogatory. If you are not sure if a piece of content is one of these things, it probably is. Some examples of content which is permissable:

Some examples of content which are not permissible:

..... Religious texts ..... looks perfectly clear to me...case closed.

unless folks want to change the rule. while discussing rule change, consider including (alongside SWORD) the "Qur'an For Linux"http://zekr.org/..

and, ponder those devs renaming and adopting a logo historically relevant like the Crusader's sword http://www.crosswire.org/sword/index.jsp...(i doubt it but) maybe zekr.org will change to a more eye-catching Scimitar, Jambiya, or Boeing 7X7 ??

if the rule changes, would openSUSE have to allow the packages of other religions, major and minor? I agree that we (OS) should not carry religious texts in the packages. I don't know if the rules prevent people creating& maintaining a repository with these texts, but can't see any reason why we'd prevent that.

Perhaps if the religions could agree internally and with each other about the acceptable and valid texts then we should reconsider. The first step is to create an agreed list of the valid religions and the variants which are correct. Any offers (not on list please)?

David

My list Atheism Buddhism Christianity Hindi Judaism Islam Wicca -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Am 11.09.2011 00:56, schrieb Helen South:

The packaging guidelines do indeed state that religious texts are not permitted.

Therefore, I assume that at some point there has been discussion (no doubt at length) by the project over this matter. Perhaps someone can reference this decision?

If members want this guideline to be changed, they should bring it before a board member for discussion at project meetings and/or voting as appropriate. Such a discussion would include the ethical issues around including these texts, rules around wording descriptions if they are included, and the category for inclusion. Bear in mind that religious texts are important cultural documents so don't assume they are only used for the purpose of proselytizing. Indeed, such tools may be useful for anti-theists participating in debates on biblical history, as well as for historical and cultural exploration.

What is NOT appropriate is the personal attack - direct or implicit - in the language used in this discussion. I have strong personal views on this matter but when discussing it on an openSUSE list I hope I'd be able to put these views aside and exercise both logic and compassion. These verbal barbs were also used recently in discussion regarding categorization of Astrological software. Shall we also enter into debates on the ethics of medical software that facilitates the pushing of psychotropic drugs by Big Pharma, scientific software that records cruel experimentation on animals, or a GIS system for forestry 'management'? At what point do we position ourselves as arbiters of ethical choice?

Snide comments in regard to behavior of some religious groups, history, the intellectual capacity of believers, and so on do not reflect well on individuals nor on the distribution as a whole. We have seen how the media misrepresent the views of a vocal few as being the voice of the many.

We are intelligent people and I'm sure we are capable of discussing this issue without resorting to such weak emotive argument.

+1 totally agree. -- -o) Kim Leyendecker /\\ openSUSE Ambassador, openSUSE Wiki Team DE _\_v http://www.opensuse.org - Linux for open minds -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 16:54:33 +0100, Alin Marin Elena wrote:

Content should not be offensive, discriminatory, or derogatory. If you are not sure if a piece of content is one of these things, it probably is. Some examples of content which is permissable:

The issue with that description is that to a 'true believer', 'their' religious text is none of those. They have to put themselves in the shoes of someone who doesn't agree with them, and that's something that's *very* difficult for some people to do. Religious texts can be (and are) studied for reasons other than religion - for anthropological or literary reasons, for example. As such, 'education' seems an entirely appropriate classification to me. I think we distract from the overall purpose of openSUSE by 'legislating' minutiae about what is OK in a package description or not. If it's not installed on my system by default (and it isn't), I don't really care what the description says as I'm not likely to encounter it unless I go searching for it. If I do that, I'm *probably* going out of my way to be offended, and it's my own fault. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Agreed on the last posts. I am a historian myself and I have used religious texts under Linux for college. I was grateful to have openSUSE build software like this. I felt included. Otherwise I would have had to deal with Microsoft and their wider range of software to do something like this. Andy On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

I think the correct repository is the "Education" one.

Best, A. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org