On Fri, 29 May 2009 14:23:01 +0200 Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > IMHO it is not Fedora's job to define family values & moralities. > > Such morals/values will vary all around the world, such that no > > single list Fedora makes would be satisfactory. If a derived spin > > wants to define a set of morals & values then the burden should be > > on them to maintain the list of packages that don't comply, not > > Fedora. > > +1 > > Kevin Kofler > +10. Every culture - or even individual's - moral compass varies from others, even slightly. Trying to define morality for a large non-homogenous group is almost certainly going to upset a significant proportion of that group that don't agree with the definition, often with undesirable results - "it'll all end in tears" would be an appropriate English idiom; IOW doomed - just ask my (Australian) Communications Minister :-). If you're going to maintain a spin for a like-minded community (like ojuba.org is) then the onus is on those maintainers to decide on and cull those packages that they deem inappropriate from their compose. For Fedora to do so would be outside our collective bailiwick (IMHO) and as Kevin correctly notes no single list would please everyone all of the time - I know some folks who may object to gnome-sword for example. Michael. -- Michael Fleming <mfleming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - (EMail/XMPP/Jabber) WWW: http://www.thatfleminggent.com Fedora / Red Hat Packages: http://www.thatfleminggent.com/rpm-packages Twitter: http://twitter.com/thatfleminggent -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
