David Woodhouse wrote:
> Consider the following statement:
> On the other hand, $PROJECT upstream explicitly decided NOT to
> ban profanity, as they consider banning profanity to be a
> political move and to go against $PROJECT's principle of
> political neutrality.
>
> Would people be arguing to ship that project, unmodified, in Fedora?
Hell fucking yeah!
> Try the same statement with s/profanity/sexually explicit images/.
Same here, if e.g. KDE started shipping sexual wallpapers, I don't see why
we wouldn't ship them in kdebase-workspace-wallpapers or
kdeartwork-wallpapers. (Now those are not installed by default, but that's
a size issue and unrelated to the content. There are no sexual wallpapers
in them at this time, at least none that I know of.)
I also consider the censorship of screensavers which is now done in
xscreensaver (renaming of tangrams with vulgar or sexual titles, webcollage
not actually being a *web* collage by default to avoid fetching sexual
content) stupid, if it was just me I'd have closed all those complaints as
NOTABUG.
> Besides, the KDE position doesn't make any sense -- you either ship (for
> example) a Taiwanese flag, or you don't.
FWIW, KDE ships it.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
