Phil Wyett writes ("Re: Proposed change of offensive packages to -offensive"):
> In my honest opinion, rating certain content types within a package should be
> done along the lines of PEGI[1]. A self regulatory rating done as part of a
> social policy and administered by the particular packages maintainer. All
> subsequent questioning of rating would be done via bug reports against the
> particular package.I think this is gross overkill for the very small number of packages for which it is relevant. Encoding the situation in the package name, and/or describing any issues in prose in the Description, seem like proportionate responses. > * Rating set within debian folder - maybe rating file. > * Seen on packages.d.o, PTS and query by apt etc. for package. > * Should not be auto installed as a recommends etc. If you think I am wrong then the next steps would be: 1. Make a properly documented technical proposal for where this metadata would be found and how it would be transferred and what format it would be in. 2. Write proof-of-concept patches for at least some of apt-search, apt-get install, p.d.o, etc., to allow the user to specify a policy, and implmenet that policy. 3. Write proof-of-concept patches for at least some packages, adding the metadata. I think even (1) is far too much work. Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
