On 11/20/2009 05:53 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
Just this morning I was noting ("complaining about", I guess) this on
IRC.
"RC" == Ralf Corsepius<rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
RC> The problem I have with this package providing a precedence of how
RC> to circumvent Fedora's regulations/guidelines etc. to use Fedora as
RC> means to distribute "mere content".
Well, the interesting thing is that it's not this package which would
provide the precedent. In fact, there are already several precedents in
the distro, depending on which facet of the code vs. content issue you
choose to examine.
I wasn't aware about this. Which packages are you referring to?
RC> What to do about this package and about this issue in general?
All I know is that it's terribly difficult for anyone to finely define
the boundary of acceptability here.
Exactly.
Program documentation is obviously
OK. What about programming documentation? A Perl tutorial or Dive into
Python? A generic book on Java programming? It's not too far from
there to all of Project Gutenberg, and it hasn't really been that long
since the issue of books was discussed to death on fedora-devel. Not to
mention that even if you could somehow accurately lay out a boundary of
acceptability, you'd then have to turn around and address the issue of
quality.
I for one, don't have much problems with such kind of content, as long
as its somehow directly related to Linux and/or Fedora.
I have to admit, though, that pictures of your favorite city or
amphibian or whatever just don't seem to me to have much point, even if
they are wrapped in the necessary bits so that they work as a
screensaver.
This is what I feel is going to happen here - Which "content collection"
will be next?
<sarcasm>
We should try to contact the tourism offices, marketing agencies and
photographers all around the world and point them to the marketing
opportunities Fedora offers to them.
</sarcasm>
But then we ship a bunch of "*-backgrounds*" packages and
nobody seems to complain.
Well, may-be these packages should be revisited and re-reviewed?
In the end, it isn't really up to FPC to make the policy on what's
acceptable here,
Agreed. Finding a solution would be FESCO's and/or FPB's job.
and if we're concerned about limiting the size of the
distro then there's plenty of other cruft that you'd have to put up on
the chopping block as well. I think FESCo is going to have to address
this sooner or later, because it's not a big jump from some pictures of
London to pictures of hot girls and who knows what else.
For some reason this makes me wonder if we still patch out the "penis"
configuration from the snake screensaver.
My concern isn't cultural issues/differences, mine is "mass" and
"usefulness".
Ralf
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
