SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Debian project has suffered from a long string of negative events recently, ranging from severe discontent over the inclusion of systemd, to talk of forking the project, to a grave bug affecting the important 'wine' package, to the resignation and reduced involvement of long time contributors.
The latest strife affecting Debian revolves around a request for a Debian package of the GPC-Slots 2 software. This request has been rejected with little more than an ad hominem attack against the software's author.
In response to the request, Stephen Gran wrote,
This is code by someone who routinely trolls Debian. I doubt we want any more poisonous upstreams in Debian, so I at least would prefer this never get packaged.
Jonathan Wiltshire proceeded to mark the request as 'wontfix', and closed it.
While Debian does strive to maintain high standards regarding the software it packages, the negative and personal nature of this rejection, without any apparent technical or licensing concerns, appears to conflict with Debian's own Code of Conduct. Such a personal attack could be seen as contradictory to the Code of Conduct's mandate that Debian participants "Be respectful", "Be collaborative", and most importantly, "Assume good faith".
Given its recent troubles as of late, many of them concerning the poor treatment of Debian developers and users alike, can Debian really afford to get embroiled in yet another negative incident?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23 2014, @11:23PM
Imagine the game had a hidden feature like filling your screen with racists remarks.
Would you still want it in the distro?
FYI replace racist with sexists and it's what you're trying to defend.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23 2014, @11:31PM
I don't think it should be up to the distro maintainers to make judgments like that. If the software isn't harmful from a technological standpoint (that is, it doesn't damage the computer system in some way), and it merely expresses ideas that some may find offensive, then a package for it should obviously be included. And the package's description would obviously describe what the software does, so users can make an informed decision about whether or not they want to install it. But at least users would have the option. That's the point of a distro: making it convenient for users to install software. It should not be about filtering software based on ideas the software may express.
(Score: 2) by fnj on Monday November 24 2014, @12:09AM
If the game violates the charter in some specific way, let the bureaucrats note that fact with specificity, not namecall the author a "troll" without any explanation.
Or if they just don't want to spend the slight effort on packaging the software because it's not significant enough, let them say that.
I figure it's likely it DOES violate the charter, but in case it doesn't, let them FIX THE CHARTER. I'm sorry, but just acting all high and mighty and not deigning to give a meaningful reason for denial doesn't wash.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24 2014, @02:40AM
oh ffs.... sudo apt-get remove packagethatoffendsme
2 seconds later I no longer deal with it and it consumes 0 space from my harddrive.
Are you that thin skinned?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24 2014, @08:48AM
Let's play Devil's Advocate then shall we?
Debian let's the package in, some feminist hears about it and rallys their SJW crowd into action.
Linux is then labeled the misogynist troll OS, good job!
Yeah, I'd tell the guy to fuck off just to avoid that shitstorm too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 25 2014, @03:08AM
The feminists have allready taken over every linux distro.
So what are you talking about.
They launched their attack years ago and were successful