Emmanuel Arias:
IMO this idea represent a big work. And if you want to involved
upstream, maybe will be a problem. Some upstream, could not be
interest on participate because could be a "extra" work. But if we
implement a content rating system, the freedom could be affected
because the
Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 11:51 Uhr schrieb Bagas Sanjaya :
>
> Simon McVittie:
>
> Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is
> distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak),
> has this as an optional field for self-rating:
>
>
Simon McVittie:
Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is
distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak),
has this as an optional field for self-rating:
Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 10:15 Uhr schrieb Simon McVittie :
>
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:31:44 +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> > Also, it seems clear to me that the same game in all Linux disros is
> > very likely to get the same rating, so this would be better done as a
> > distribution agnostic
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:31:44 +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> Also, it seems clear to me that the same game in all Linux disros is
> very likely to get the same rating, so this would be better done as a
> distribution agnostic level
Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams
Philip Hands writes:
> What is it going to cost us to get 'bison' rated PG? Why is this
> useful?
Erm, not 'PG' -- I meant whatever the "Anyone can watch this" label is.
Although, I guess one could perhaps argue PG for bison:
One could use it to build something that generates offensive
Bagas Sanjaya writes:
> Russ Allbery:
>> It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not
>> to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of
>> them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on),
>> and I'm not clear on
Russ Allbery:
It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not
to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of
them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on),
and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason
8 matches
Mail list logo
