> Julian H. Stacey wrote:
>
> > FYI in case newer than yours, Fonz, I have
> > MD5 (9.2-RELEASE/wmfortune-0.241.tar.gz) =3D fa8db5d9a46d9afe7757f498c7=
> 81e8c9
> > SHA256 (9.2-RELEASE/wmfortune-0.241.tar.gz) =3D b149067b7e3521f7e03354b=
> 12754baaf9c5556af4d286bbd6d169b1db9f6dba0
> >=20
> > I
Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> FYI in case newer than yours, Fonz, I have
> MD5 (9.2-RELEASE/wmfortune-0.241.tar.gz) = fa8db5d9a46d9afe7757f498c781e8c9
> SHA256 (9.2-RELEASE/wmfortune-0.241.tar.gz) =
> b149067b7e3521f7e03354b12754baaf9c5556af4d286bbd6d169b1db9f6dba0
>
> It builds & run on my 9.2,
Hi, Reference:
> From: Alphons van Werven
> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 18:37:52 +0200
Alphons van Werven wrote:
> Dave Horsfall wrote:
>
> >> There used to be "offensive" (a term to be taken rather loosely in this=
> =20
> >> case) fortune cookies, but they got kicked out somewhere i
On 10/26/16 03:56, David Demelier wrote:
On 10/26/2016 09:32 AM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
I think unless FreeBSD makes explicit antichrist statement, there is
no problem having a daemon mascot. I have never heard any religious
problem so far. Or then I missed something.
Approx. 20 years ago (?)
On 10/26/2016 09:32 AM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
I think unless FreeBSD makes explicit antichrist statement, there is
no problem having a daemon mascot. I have never heard any religious
problem so far. Or then I missed something.
Approx. 20 years ago (?), some FreeBSD developer with a old-style
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 09:32:55 +0200
Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > I think unless FreeBSD makes explicit antichrist statement, there is
> > no problem having a daemon mascot. I have never heard any religious
> > problem so far. Or then I missed something.
>
> Approx. 20 years ago (?), some Fre
Hi!
> I think unless FreeBSD makes explicit antichrist statement, there is
> no problem having a daemon mascot. I have never heard any religious
> problem so far. Or then I missed something.
Approx. 20 years ago (?), some FreeBSD developer with a old-style
logo on a t-shirt was asked to leave som
2016-10-25 22:57 GMT+02:00 Dave Horsfall :
> Have you seen the FreeBSD home page?
Well, I thought the OP was talking about the logo [0], not the home
web page. Anyway, I think comparing religious and offensive content a
bit offtopic.
I think unless FreeBSD makes explicit antichrist statement, the
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016, David Demelier wrote:
> I'm a bit surprised to see so much traffic about the jive removal.
I'm not :-)
> I personally don't care about offensive software, users are free to not
> use it (sudo may have funny insults, disabled by default though).
> Perhaps marking it broken
> can anyone in
> this thread explain why misc/jive is considered offensive and removed
I'd like to extend the question: is there a new policy about "offensive"
ports not being allowed in the ports tree any longer? If so, could
someone point me to it?
If not, then, well, I don't know what to say.
2016-10-24 20:21 GMT+02:00 Dave Hayes :
> On 10/23/2016 19:10, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>>
>> In a mail thread about jive that finding is very mature 8-}
>
>
> Speaking of maturity and attempting to add consistency, can anyone in this
> thread explain why misc/jive is considered offensive and removed, bu
On 10/23/2016 19:10, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
In a mail thread about jive that finding is very mature 8-}
Speaking of maturity and attempting to add consistency, can anyone in
this thread explain why misc/jive is considered offensive and removed,
but the FreeBSD daemon logo (on the main web page) i
On 24/10/2016 17:11, Mikhail T. wrote:
> Now that we are done with the hairsplitting, and I shall put the port
> back as soon as I have a moment -- unless someone else beats me to it.
>
> I'd also like to ask portmgr@ to avoid taking such steps in the future
> -- inventing a policy in order to im
On 24.10.2016 11:51, Mark Linimon wrote:
Or:
- expired, replaced by newer version
- unfetchable
- license does not allow anyone to package it
- author requested(*) removal
I have personally removed ports fitting each of these criteria at various
times. I am sure I am missing some other
On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 03:56:07PM -0400, Mikhail T. wrote:
> Technically, the only reason to remove a port is due to a failure to
> build -- and that hasn't happened.
Or:
- expired, replaced by newer version
- unfetchable
- license does not allow anyone to package it
- author requested(*) re
On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 01:59:17 +1100 (EST)
Dave Horsfall wrote:
> Next thing you know, "valgirl" will be deleted from Usenet...
Let's not forget about Corporate Bullshit Generator!
http://cbsg.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/live
Those poor C-suites must feel offended by such mockery!
Not in freebsd por
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 09:54:56AM +0200, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote:
> On 24.10.2016 09:16, Greg Byshenk wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:05:52AM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> >
> >> "Common decency" is disputable even in within USA; Europe is less
> >> infested with USA style prissy "polit
On 24.10.2016 09:16, Greg Byshenk wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:05:52AM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
Mark Linimon wrote:
It's not delusions of moral superiority. It's common decency.
"Common decency" is disputable even in within USA; Europe is less
infested with USA style prissy "po
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:05:52AM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Mark Linimon wrote:
> > It's not delusions of moral superiority. It's common decency.
> "Common decency" is disputable even in within USA; Europe is less
> infested with USA style prissy "political correctness", & other
> place
> Why can't we accept that a program which may be well over 30 years old,
> hasn't seen any update since 20 years, is more or less lost since some
> time and has no technical value (it's just some parody of a text filter)
> can be removed from the tree? Anyone who needs this port can install it
> o
Hi!
> > that makes them look like a bunch of out-of-touch clueless old white
> > guys;
>
> Inflamatory language degrades, Mature language builds.
In a mail thread about jive that finding is very mature 8-}
--
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
___
Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 01:31:04PM +0200, Alphons van Werven wrote:
> > I'm still half waiting for someone with misguided delusions of moral
> > superiority to delete that port, thinking it's their decision to make
> > that FreeBSD must not enable people to display their syste
## Mikhail T. (mi+t...@aldan.algebra.com):
> > It's not delusions of moral superiority. It's common decency.
> If it was "decent" in 1997, when obrien added it, it must still be
> decent today, only 19 years later. Nothing has changed about "decency"
> since then.
Oh, it has changed. And it ke
On 22.10.2016 Mark Linimon wrote:
It's not delusions of moral superiority. It's common decency.
If it was "decent" in 1997, when obrien added it, it must still be
decent today, only 19 years later. Nothing has changed about "decency"
since then.
juvenile junk that makes them look like a b
[Default] On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 20:30:05 +0200, Matthias Apitz
wrote:
>El día Sunday, October 23, 2016 a las 02:13:12PM -0400, scratch65...@att.net
>escribió:
>
>> I've to disagree, Matthias. Technical people refusing to be
>> part of the social world make themselves the tools of
>> psychopaths.
El día Sunday, October 23, 2016 a las 02:13:12PM -0400, scratch65...@att.net
escribió:
> I've to disagree, Matthias. Technical people refusing to be
> part of the social world make themselves the tools of
> psychopaths. Then we have, as the mordant joke goes, the program
> nuke_germany being o
I've to disagree, Matthias. Technical people refusing to be
part of the social world make themselves the tools of
psychopaths. Then we have, as the mordant joke goes, the program
nuke_germany being objected to not on humanitarian grounds, but
because the program should be nuke_country with the t
Dave Horsfall wrote:
>> There used to be "offensive" (a term to be taken rather loosely in this
>> case) fortune cookies, but they got kicked out somewhere in 9.X. That
>> was the base system though; not the ports tree.
>
> Not to mention "fortune -o" (to get the obscene versions) and there wer
I think, we should end this thread. The port was removed, sure with good
reasons. If someone wants to use it. he can pull out from svn the old port
and continue with it to maintain.
matthias
--
Sent from my Ubuntu phone
http://www.unixarea.de/
__
Hi!
> Is this -- being more inclusive (whatever that means) --
> even a valid goal for a technical project?
That depends on those working on the project. If they wonder
why systems programming is so one-sided when it cames to age,
gender, race, etc, then: yes, it becomes a goal.
Please remember
Hi!
> Who exactly was offended by the existence of misc/jive in ports? Were
> there any actual complaints? How many?
One, in August. portmgr had a look at the port and decided on the removal.
--
p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
___
Hi,
Who exactly was offended by the existence of misc/jive in ports? Were
there any actual complaints? How many?
Regards,
--
Before enlightenment - chop wood, draw water.
After enlightenment - chop wood, draw water.
Marko Cupać
https://www.mimar.rs/
Mark Linimon wrote:
>>>
>>
>> Answering opposition/criticism with violence isn't exactly my style.
>
> If you say something that makes me want to plow my face into my hands,
> that's violence?
I stand corrected. Something got lost in translation there.
Fonz
--
A.J. "Fonz" van Werven
mailsi
On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:44:11AM +0200, Alphons van Werven wrote:
> >
>
> Answering opposition/criticism with violence isn't exactly my style.
So.
If you say something that makes me want to plow my face into my hands,
that's violence?
Wow.
mcl
___
On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, Alphons van Werven wrote:
> There used to be "offensive" (a term to be taken rather loosely in this
> case) fortune cookies, but they got kicked out somewhere in 9.X. That
> was the base system though; not the ports tree.
Not to mention "fortune -o" (to get the obscene vers
Mark Linimon wrote:
>
Answering opposition/criticism with violence isn't exactly my style. I
tend to take it as an indication that one has run out of rational
arguments.
Moreover, I think you'll find that the word you're looking for is
.
> It's not delusions of moral superiority. It's common
On 22.10.2016 05:27, Mark Linimon wrote:
disclaimer: I wasn't the person who made the decision.
You are too humble, Mark. Whoever actually did it, would not have gone
ahead if you objected.
The "pro" removal points: some of these terms are no longer acceptable
in polite society, and far cro
On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 05:46:15PM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Censorship is offensive. Censor the offensive Censor: remove his/her commit
> bit.
IIUC correctly you will be removing more than one commit bit, but again,
I cannot speak for those who made the decision.
"Free Speech" means _you
On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 01:31:04PM +0200, Alphons van Werven wrote:
> I'm still half waiting for someone with misguided delusions of moral
> superiority to delete that port, thinking it's their decision to make
> that FreeBSD must not enable people to display their system load as a
> cartoon woman
Grzegorz Junka wrote:
> Could you maybe have a separate category in ports, called "uncensored" or
> something? We are all adults and can take care of ourselves, can't we?
If memory serves me well, that has been suggested before and there were
reasons (which I don't remember) for not doing that. M
Grzegorz Junka wrote:
>
> On 22/10/2016 11:31, Alphons van Werven wrote:
> > andrew clarke wrote:
> >
> >> Is this the first time a port has been deleted for being "offensive"?
> > There used to be "offensive" (a term to be taken rather loosely in this
> > case) fortune cookies, but they got kicke
On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, andrew clarke wrote:
> At the risk of this developing into a flame war, I thought this was
> curious:
>
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/2016-August/126687.html
>
> Is this the first time a port has been deleted for being "offensive"?
"man jive | jive" i
On 22/10/2016 11:31, Alphons van Werven wrote:
andrew clarke wrote:
Is this the first time a port has been deleted for being "offensive"?
There used to be "offensive" (a term to be taken rather loosely in this
case) fortune cookies, but they got kicked out somewhere in 9.X. That was
the base
andrew clarke wrote:
> Is this the first time a port has been deleted for being "offensive"?
There used to be "offensive" (a term to be taken rather loosely in this
case) fortune cookies, but they got kicked out somewhere in 9.X. That was
the base system though; not the ports tree.
Come to think
disclaimer: I wasn't the person who made the decision.
This change became contentious after it was made; however, that
discussion only occurred on internal mailing lists.
The "pro" removal points: some of these terms are no longer acceptable
in polite society, and far cross the line from humor to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 13:45:10 +1100
andrew clarke wrote:
> At the risk of this developing into a flame war, I thought this was
> curious:
>
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/2016-August/126687.html
>
> Is this the first time a port has been deleted for being "offensive"?
>Fro
At the risk of this developing into a flame war, I thought this was
curious:
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/2016-August/126687.html
Is this the first time a port has been deleted for being "offensive"?
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org m
47 matches
Mail list logo
