>>>>> "Steve" == Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> writes:
Steve> This isn't Sodom and Gomorrah; the package shouldn't be
Steve> spared from death because you found 5 good fortunes in it.
Steve> This package is a fossilized collection of fortunes that some
Steve> random people on Usenet found funny or otherwise worthy of
Steve> inclusion over 25 years ago. There are subcollections of
Steve> fortunes in this package that are explicitly *categorized* as
Steve> racist, homophobic, and misogynistic.
Steve> The package IS garbage. I've looked at those files, the
Steve> categorizations are not incorrect, and there is no redeeming
Steve> value in shipping such things in Debian.
Steve> If someone wants to sift through the contents of fortunes-off
Steve> to separate the wheat from the chaff, fine, let them do it.
Steve> But the presence of some good fortunes in the package doesn't
Steve> compel anyone to keep it, nor does rightly pointing out the
Steve> garbage that's in it incur an obligation to do the work to
Steve> filter out only the stuff that conflicts with the project's
Steve> Diversity Statement.
Steve, I absolutely agree with you that unless someone is going to do
the work of maintaining the package that it should not be in Debian.
We disagree to some degree on what work is required.
I have said I won't get involved in fortunes-off unless asked to do so.
But to the extent that your message talks about the broader issues, and
what our project consensus might be, I will respond.
I disagree with you that we have a project consensus that the diversity
statement should apply to software in Debian.
I would not support such a consensus.
I disagree that racist, homophobic or misogynistic content in the
creative areas of Debian is inherently something we should not
distribute simply because it is racist, homophobic, or misogynistic. I
think it depends on context.
I speak up only that my silence not be counted as supporting a consensus
that I do not think exists.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
