Devon, Thanks for your support. You're right. This is not intended to be a political debate, so I have been using a neutral word, Taiwan, rather than other more official but sensitive, less common name. It's the fact that ISO is not reflecting how most of the world see it. ISO does not have authority over the country name. ISO does not obligate to reflect how world sees things too. I'm not asking for special treatments. I'm just asking you to follow the convention created from previous experience to prevent the misunderstanding and debates. I want to point out one thing. I will be willing to bring this to the upstream project. However, if the upstream project is unwilling to make the changes and maybe suggest us to fork a new project instead. The choice of using the which plugin will fall back to the ArchLinux community. The whole debate will go through again. This is not something just my imagination. This is a real story happened in Rails(Ruby's counterparts of django) community where Rails split out country list as a separate project and people do fork to provide a better version. Dear all ArchLinux developers, please think it through again. Thanks. If possible, use Devon's suggestion. ------------------------------ *From:* "Devon Sawatzky" <s4wa7z@xxxxxxxxx> *To:* "General Discussion about Arch Linux" <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Sent:* July 2, 2012 1:26 PM *Subject:* Re: [arch-general] Country Name (ISO-3116) Issues As Gaetan pointed out, it is not the job of Linux distribution maintainers to decide country names. But it seems to me this whole issue is not really about deciding what to name a country as that decision has already been made by many. The fact is simply that the data being used does not accurately reflect the world as most see it today. If this is not the case and this is in fact a political debate, then I am wrong, but it appears to me this is a technical debate about whether it is the responsibility of Arch, or someone else to implement the change. I would like to suggest that this is a fairly trivial change, so whether Arch "is supposed to" change the name is irrelevant. The fact remains that, regardless of whether they are obligated to change it or not, it is an easy thing to do that would be very positive for a lot of people. A good solution it seems would be to implement a temporary workaround and apply pressure upstream for a permanent fix using the weight of Arch's influence. Devon Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 11:41 PM, Myra Nelson wrote: > On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Andrew Hills wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Allan McRae wrote: > >> I have found a solution. All mirrors in countries with disputed names > >> are just removed from the official mirrorlist. > > > > I believe servers south of the Mason-Dixon line should be listed under > > the country name "Confederate States of America". Under this new > > solution, I propose removing USA servers south of the Mason-Dixon line > > from the mirrorlist. > > > > --Andrew Hills > > A little more bikeshed. > > I propose all servers not located in the Republic of Texas be removed > from the mirrorlist. Oh yeah the rest of y'all call us a state now. > > Myra > > -- > Life's fun when your sick and psychotic! >
