Talk:PackagingDrafts/InappropriateContents

From FedoraProject

< Talk:PackagingDrafts(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 12: Line 12:
 
----
 
----
 
Furthermore, I think that packages already contain sufficient information about the nature of their contents in their %description, even without this guideline. If you find a package with bad %description, just file a bug.
 
Furthermore, I think that packages already contain sufficient information about the nature of their contents in their %description, even without this guideline. If you find a package with bad %description, just file a bug.
 
+
----
 
* I did not asked for the maintainer to rate his package in order for it to be accepted. Let's phrase it like this: if the upstream web site notes that the package have been rated by some entity, then it should be listed
 
* I did not asked for the maintainer to rate his package in order for it to be accepted. Let's phrase it like this: if the upstream web site notes that the package have been rated by some entity, then it should be listed
* I renamed it from InappropriatePackagesList to [[InappropriatePackagesAdvisory]]
+
* I renamed it from InappropriatePackagesList to [[Inappropriate_Packages_Advisory]]
 
* regarding BBFC, OFLC according to wikipedia they have rated games such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_(video_game) GTA] (the game not the film)
 
* regarding BBFC, OFLC according to wikipedia they have rated games such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_(video_game) GTA] (the game not the film)
 
*Are you going to sponsor this and submit them games for rating?  
 
*Are you going to sponsor this and submit them games for rating?  

Latest revision as of 09:45, 30 May 2009

if the package was classified by some legal entity or NGO as inappropriate. Some entity? That's very vague and easy to abuse. Silly example: I can create my own organization and declare any program which does not play my national anthem on startup as inappropriate, thus making your InappropriatePackagesList equal the contents of the pkgdb.

(such as ESRC...) According to the wikipedia article, it costs at least $800 to have a computer game rated by ESRC. Are you going to sponsor this and submit them games for rating?

The other two organizations (BBFC, OFLC) rate films, so they're both irrelevant for software distribution.


I, as a Fedora packager, am not willing to do research for any software I package to find if there might be any crazy rating-assigning organization in the world that would find my package inappropriate. Whatever I do, I do according to my own moral and family values. I can't be expected to be familiar with everyone else's.


Furthermore, I think that packages already contain sufficient information about the nature of their contents in their %description, even without this guideline. If you find a package with bad %description, just file a bug.


  • I did not asked for the maintainer to rate his package in order for it to be accepted. Let's phrase it like this: if the upstream web site notes that the package have been rated by some entity, then it should be listed
  • I renamed it from InappropriatePackagesList to Inappropriate_Packages_Advisory
  • regarding BBFC, OFLC according to wikipedia they have rated games such as GTA (the game not the film)
  • Are you going to sponsor this and submit them games for rating?
    • I said if it's already rated
  • Whatever I do, I do according to my own moral and family values. I can't be expected to be familiar with everyone else's.
    • that is great and sufficient

feel free to adjust my phrasing. Alsadi 20:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)