[100% personal opinion here...] Most packages in Fedora could be used to do something that someone in any culture could find offensive. There are sub-cultures in the USA that consider porn offensive, yet this is where we push "freedom" the most. Emacs can be used to write anti-pick-a-religion propoganda. OOcalc can be used to design terrorist bombs. Where do we draw the line? Answer: we don't. We let the users draw the line for themselves. IMHO, breaking out porn-specific support into separate files (as youtube_dl does) gives users and packagers (such as Fedora) the freedom to include or exclude these files as desired. I do not think that means that Fedora should exclude them just because some people would find their use offensive. In any culture that finds XYZ offensive, there will be members of that culture that disagree. We value freedom - the members of those cultures have the freedom to use or not use those features as they see fit. It is not our place to make such distinctions, especially when the choice is made for "the greater good", whether by a corporation, government, or moral majority. "That way, anyone can use any of our work for their own purposes," Further, the bug report mentions "an enterprise class operating system" but Fedora is definitely not targetting that role, so that assumption is simply invalid. "you never have to wait long to see the latest and greatest software, while there are other Linux products derived from Fedora you can use for long-term stability." Note: I'm not arguing against removing that functionality per se. I *am* arguing against the specifics of this bug and its reasons for removal. If it is removed, let's make sure it's removed because of reasons that are compatible with our core values. "guidelines disallows something with porn" Does this package *contain* porn? Or is it merely a means to *access* porn stored elsewhere? If you're planning on removing it for the latter, you'll have to remove all web browsers too. And wget. Maybe all networking packages and multimedia viewers. And emacs. IMHO in the "Code Vs Content" choice, this package is code, not content, and the restrictions for content don't apply. If we let someone tell us to not distribute this code because it could be used in ways they don't like, others will try to stop us from distributing other code that they don't want us to have. That is clearly against our core values. "In some corporate cultures, use of free software is considered offensive. Please remove Fedora." Let the violent agreement and strawman-bashing begin ;) -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
