Re: Debian should not link to n*zis nor ship their software (Re: Debian Certified Laptops -- Possibility of collaborating with Framework?

This is a MIME formatted message with attachments. Use a MIME-compliant client to view it properly.
--bzz_bzz__bzz__1a98qns2a1l52tf17so3bbtuvkk36ngo
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

On Thu, 14 May 2026 12:13, Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote:
>Dominik George <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>>tech-ctte rules on *technical* issues, so this doesn't really seem
>>>within their  mandate. And the community team has no powers on the
>>>contents of packages.
>>
>> It occurred to me, on several occasions, that noone in Debian (short
>> of its members via a GR) is responsible for overseeing the Social
>> Contract. Maybe with all the topics of these days (AI and its
>> consequences, facsism,…), it's time for some sort of ethical council,
>> and for updating the Social Contract?
+1
>
>I think this issue is somewhat similar to the advertisement concern with
>gnome-control-center:
>
>https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1136336
>
>In both packages, there is no real clear guidance from Debian Policies
>what is deemed to be acceptable contents within a package.
>
The gnome-control-center popup is a non-issue IMO since KDE also has a 
donation banner, just not as frequent.
>It seems both these issues could be helped by better guidance on 
>matters
>of acceptable package content.
>
There is a stark contrast between asking for donations and having 
obvious hateful content in a package (and yes, that includes the 
homepage).
>Personally, I would find it really problematic if we would have a hard
>policy to filter packages depending on political, religious,
>philosophical etc views of the upstream author.
>
TTBOMK we do not have a clear policy on this, but we should. The DFSG 
already provides the framework, it's just not enforced yet.
>That's a slippery slope to motivate excluding just about anything,
>depending on your own political/religious/philosophical/etc preferences.
>
I like to point out the tolerance paradoxon here [0]. No one is 
suggesting to remove packages just on a whim; however distributing what 
is obviously hateful content does not fit the project values at all.
Especially when it's such a clear-cut case. The very minimum would be to 
remove the homepage.
>That said, I also have sympathy with the goal to shepherd an inclusive
>and friendly atmosphere and Operating System that promotes the spirit of
>the DSC/DFSG.
>
>Having a package that display a really provocative message to the user
>inside Debian seems problematic and warrant discussion and possibly some
>action.
>
>Maybe we don't need to bike-shed the engineering approach to social
>concerns by defining a rigid policy document.  Social issues cannot
>always be resolved by technical procedures.
>
>Thus, I propose to write down some guiding principle on this, with
>examples of clearly offensive content that maintainers should be
>patching out.  It doesn't have to be a hard policy, but a guiding
>principle around a complex social topic.

Well, the DFSG exits, we just don't have it mandating actions for 
packages (which IMO should be discussed).
I'd like to point out §5 here [1].
>Such a document would encourage good social behaviour, and maybe we
>could have a committe that guide maintainers on these matters is useful
>as a escalation point different to the tech-ctte.
>
>FWIW, Petter did patch out the offensive messages here, which seems
>somewhat reasonable.  Dropping the Homepage URL may be warranted in this
>situation too, but it could also be an over-reaction that is
>counter-productive for end-users.  Repacking the upstream source code
>without the offensive message could be done, but also has negative
>consequences for auditing costs and maintainance.
>
I fail to see how this is an overreaction; users *really* wanting to 
visit the homepage can always look it up themselves.

best,

werdahias

{0} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
[1] https://www.debian.org/social_contract
--bzz_bzz__bzz__1a98qns2a1l52tf17so3bbtuvkk36ngo
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; charset="utf-8"; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYKAB0WIQQUWTv/Sl6/b+DpcW7svtu2B7myvgUCagXgswAKCRDsvtu2B7my
vuBBAP98skDpY7ULB6ae1147zZWuT/dqWzkN6hQcF4DkCNa8qQEAqjBrl+Bme0p+
d3oEwlZYgHWrLqF5qfCQNNo5FmllcQ8=
=+9ux
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--bzz_bzz__bzz__1a98qns2a1l52tf17so3bbtuvkk36ngo--