Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1264 mails)

[Roger Luedecke <roger.luedecke@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Saturday, September 10, 2011 02:57:24 AM Dale Ritchey wrote:
> On 09/10/2011 12:33 AM, Brian K. White wrote:
> > On 9/9/2011 5:59 AM, 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.
> > >
> > > I have the feeling that openSUSE should take neutral stance, be
> > > inviting and
> > > open for everyone (and we're quite good at that already). But I'm not
> > > sure if
> > > we should provide a stage for non-technical biased views. Even less
> > > so for
> > > those with a mission. Thus, the question I'd like to ask is whether
> > > we should
> > > allow such formulations or not. Do we already have policy for that or
> > > do we
> > > care at all?
> >
> > Rephrase the description to the upstream description or similar one
> > that makes no implied judgements.
> >
> > Keep the package wherever, and for the same reasons, that we keep games.
> >
> > I personally have zero use for any games, but there are plenty in the
> > distro. They don't bother me existing. I don't even mind if a few are
> > installed by default as long as they don't take up much space.
> >
> > Religious apps? I have no use for them either, and although I'm
> > absolutely atheist and have quite firm and quite unflattering opinions
> > of anyone who actually believes any of that nonsense, or even allows
> > for it's possibility in any real way, the main reason I have no use
> > for such apps is more along the lines of why I have no use for say,
> > baseball fantasy league management apps or quilting pattern database
> > apps.
> >
> > I have no problem with those apps existing because they ARE things
> > some people do with their computers.
> >
> > It doesn't matter that I don't do that with my computer, it just
> > matters that anyone anywhere for any reason does. They don't need to
> > be validated. Merely that they exist and that someone want's to use it
> > is all the validation necessary, other than the normal requirements
> > and guidelines and cost/benefit things that apply to all packages.
> >
> > Even software that's designed solely to hack other systems is valid,
> > neutral software in itself, since it's the most important security
> > study and testing material. No software or even text is inherently
> > evil. You could use bash (an equally violently named software) to
> > persue all the same goals as sword.
> >
> > Even though I think a disbelief in any religion is fundamentally
> > different than believing one religion vs another, and would argue that
> > it's perfectly valid to criticize any believer and treat them exactly
> > as you would treat anyone else who has demonstrated that they are
> > insane or incompetent or out of touch in any other way, none of that
> > really touches on whether something like a software package like this,
> > even if it included the text, should be granted or disallowed a home
> > in a distributions software repositories.
> >
> > As far as I'm concerned, treat this package exactly like Tux Racer.
> >
> > The description should be changed only because it does essentially
> > insult everyone else who doesn't happen to share the authors favorite
> > fantasy. It will be displayed by yast, an opensuse product, to all
> > users, before they opt-in to such nonsense. The upstream description
> > doesn't have that problem. At least it fails to bother me and perhaps
> > by now you get a sense that I am quick to be offended by any attempts
> > by any religious entities to tell me anything.
>
> This is already in education and have sword installed along with
> bibletime because one is useless without the other. Although I am a
> christian I see no need to have sword in openSuSE
> Oh look using the search box in the download page I found
http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3AFactory&file=E
>
ducation%2FopenSUSE_Factory%2Fi586%2Fsword-1.6.2-1.28.i586.rpm&query=sword
If its already in some repo... then why put it in factory? Sounds like it got 
categorized, and filed. I say HELL NO, to letting religions push propoganda; 
the attempt to move it into a more mainstream repository looks plain to me as 
an attempt to proselytize. If its in Education, then that is EXACTLY where it 
should remain; heck, I forgot we had an edu repo... that sort of thing is 
exactly what I was talking about; books and study aids go into their own 
library or educational repo.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx