please, no. Re: CoC policy for package contents

Holger Levsen <[email protected]> Tue, 22 Jul 2025 10:56:15 +0000

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.vote
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 09:30:38PM -0400, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
> > I'm feeling somewhat uneasy, and/because I think we have a logical problem
> > here:
> > - The CoC is about interaction between people;
> > - what we are discussiong right now is accaptable contents of   packages
> > (messages, texts).
> > 
> > That's categorically different; I can't be respectful, assume good faith, be
> > collaborative, be concise, be open, etc. against a text (as I can be about
> > other people's behaviour).
> > 
> > I see the point in this topic about creating rules about what texts we want
> > and don't want to have in Debian. But I strongly think that framing this as
> > "application of the Debian CoC for packages" is a logical dead end. - If we
> > want this, we need to create some new "What language is acceptable in
> > Debian" rules.
> That's my understanding as well. As much as I appreciate Wouter's
> efforts on this, I'm having trouble to imagine an explicitly link
> between the Debian CoC and such set of rules in practical terms.
> 
> Also, it seems to me that we're talking about an issue that isn't a
> recurrent problem in the project, so it perhaps doesn't really need new
> rules, a GR or another long thread in -vote.

+1 to everything quoted above.

> Honest question: in ~30 years, how many packages have been removed from
> our archive due to offensive content? 4? 5? How many of the removal
> requests turned into big drama?

5 and 3 I think.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

Manchmal kommt der Wind von Lee. (Konny)

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)