Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-24 Thread Mihai Popescu
 Mihai,

 I find your name quite offensive. Can you please change it
 in future mailings to this list. Perhaps Mihai Humpingforjesus ?
 That would make me feel much better.

Maybe I can do that, but doing so many things will have to change then.

For example, open from OpenBSD is quite offensive and is from adult
content category.

The same thing is with 64-bit wide OpenBSD port. Overflow is quite
tricky, too.

Master and slave are troublesome. Data wipe from disks,
especially from a hard one or USB sticks is awkward.

And the list can continue.

As for the original poster, the author tried to find out a repulsive
address since this is about spamd( i. e. spammers are using get quick
attention email addresses. People find sex and religion very annoying
on internet, hence the author made out a mix of the two. Big deal.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-24 Thread Reyk Floeter
On 24.11.2013, at 15:40, Mihai Popescu mih...@gmail.com wrote:
...

 As for the original poster, the author tried to find out a repulsive
...

We all got it and there's is no need to continue with this annoying thread.

OK? Thanks.

Reyk



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-23 Thread Kim Lidström
On 23/11/13 04:20, Jason Barbier wrote:
 
 On 11/22/2013 10:50 AM, Rick Pettit wrote:
 Lewis,

 If censorship is your thing, why don’t you start by censoring yourself.

 What you are asking for here is offensive.

 -Rick
 +1
+1


 On Nov 22, 2013, at 12:26 PM, Paolo Aglialoro paol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Il 22/nov/2013 19:07 J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org ha scritto:
 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
 If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
 the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
 happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
 of November, every year.
 Hi, Giancarlo.

 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.

 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

 Lewis
 +1



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-23 Thread Mihai Popescu
Is it over? So soon?



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-23 Thread Chris Cappuccio
Mihai Popescu [mih...@gmail.com] wrote:
 Is it over? So soon?

Mihai,

I find your name quite offensive. Can you please change it
in future mailings to this list. Perhaps Mihai Humpingforjesus ?
That would make me feel much better.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Giancarlo Razzolini
Em 21-11-2013 18:44, J. Lewis Muir escreveu:
 Hi, Shawn. I understand that, and I'm not trying to tell people how
 they should talk on a mailing list. But to me documentation for a
 project like OpenBSD is different. It's not individual people talking
 however they like to talk. It's well-written text intended for users
 to read to understand some part of the OpenBSD operating system. I
 don't know of other OpenBSD user-facing documentation (i.e. website,
 man pages, etc.) that has off-color (at least to me) content. Thanks,
 Lewis 

If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with the diff
you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life happy. Remember
to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st of November, every
year.

This thread at least put some laughs on some people's faces.

-- 
Giancarlo Razzolini
GPG: 4096R/77B981BC



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread J. Lewis Muir
On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
 If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
 the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
 happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
 of November, every year.

Hi, Giancarlo.

Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.

I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

Lewis



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Paolo Aglialoro
Il 22/nov/2013 19:07 J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org ha scritto:

 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
  If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
  the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
  happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
  of November, every year.

 Hi, Giancarlo.

 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.

 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

 Lewis

+1



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Marti Martinez
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:06 AM, J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org wrote:
 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.

You lead a charmed life, my friend. Be well.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Rick Pettit
Lewis,

If censorship is your thing, why don’t you start by censoring yourself.

What you are asking for here is offensive.

-Rick

On Nov 22, 2013, at 12:26 PM, Paolo Aglialoro paol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Il 22/nov/2013 19:07 J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org ha scritto:
 
 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
 If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
 the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
 happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
 of November, every year.
 
 Hi, Giancarlo.
 
 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.
 
 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.
 
 Lewis
 
 +1



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Donald Allen
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:06 PM, J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org wrote:
 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
 If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
 the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
 happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
 of November, every year.

 Hi, Giancarlo.

 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.

 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

What you don't seem to understand is that the developers of OpenBSD,
most importantly the project leader, don't see it your way, and it's
THEIR project. You don't do the work, they do. They give it to us as a
gift. Theo made this point earlier, but unfortunately it seems to need
reiterating. This issue is subjective, a matter of taste, and they get
to make the decisions on such matters. In my opinion, this discussion
has gone way past the point of diminishing returns (I think it started
there). You've been told we're going to do it my way, because I'm the
mommy, which most people would respond to by ceasing and desisting.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread J. Lewis Muir
On 11/22/13 12:34 PM, System Administrator wrote:
 Hi J. Lewis,

 I am not a developer, but I've been lurking on this list for a very
 long time and on that basis can tell you that you've committed two
 cardinal sins as far as this mailing list is concerned:

 1) you failed to do your homework -- had you done some research, in
 particular about the OpenBSD development philosophy, you would know
 that

Hi, Jacob.

It's unclear to me exactly what homework you think I failed to do.  I am
aware of and like lots of things that the OpenBSD project strives for.

 2) OpenBSD is the ultimate volunteer effort -- the developers do
 it in their free time FOR PERSONAL FUN. Many of them have made
 it very clear that they would cease development if it stops being
 fun. Your original message (title and intro) goes to the heart of this
 issue. Its tone and attitude is no different than the efforts in the
 Bible Belt to ban Mark Twain's Huckleberry Fin from public libraries,
 i.e. since somebody finds some content to be offensive lets get rid
 of it irrespective of the overall true value or consideration for the
 fact that the author has used the offensive language ON PURPOSE.

I don't see it that way.  Huckleberry Finn is a book, and I don't need
to read it unless I want to.  The spamd(8) man page is a man page I need
to read in order to understand how to use spamd.  And if the author of
the spamd(8) man page did use the offensive language on purpose and
thinks it's important to keep it that way, I would accept that.  I'd
disagree, but I'd accept that.  But it seems the author doesn't think
it's so important either way.  So, I don't get the strong resistance.

Thanks,

Lewis



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread System Administrator
Hi J. Lewis,

I am not a developer, but I've been lurking on this list for a very 
long time and on that basis can tell you that you've committed two 
cardinal sins as far as this mailing list is concerned:

1) you failed to do your homework -- had you done some research, in 
particular about the OpenBSD development philosophy, you would know 
that

2) OpenBSD is the ultimate volunteer effort -- the developers do it in 
their free time FOR PERSONAL FUN. Many of them have made it very 
clear that they would cease development if it stops being fun. Your 
original message (title and intro) goes to the heart of this issue. Its 
tone and attitude is no different than the efforts in the Bible Belt to 
ban Mark Twain's Huckleberry Fin from public libraries, i.e. since 
somebody finds some content to be offensive lets get rid of it 
irrespective of the overall true value or consideration for the fact 
that the author has used the offensive language ON PURPOSE.

-Jacob.

On 22 Nov 2013 at 12:06, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
  ...
 
 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.
 
 Lewis



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Paul B. Henson
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 01:09:36PM -0600, J. Lewis Muir wrote:

 I don't see it that way.  Huckleberry Finn is a book, and I don't need
 to read it unless I want to.  The spamd(8) man page is a man page I need
 to read in order to understand how to use spamd.

Let me fix that for you:

The spamd(8) man page is a man page I don't need to read it unless I
want to use spamd, a choice I am making of my own free will, and if I
don't like it, I guess I could just go use some other software that
doesn't get my panties in a bunch.

Maybe you could try spam assassin instead? Unless, of course, you find
the metaphor of killing spam offensive...



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Theo de Raadt
 2) OpenBSD is the ultimate volunteer effort -- the developers do it in 
 their free time FOR PERSONAL FUN. Many of them have made it very 
 clear that they would cease development if it stops being fun. Your 
 original message (title and intro) goes to the heart of this issue. Its 
 tone and attitude is no different than the efforts in the Bible Belt to 
 ban Mark Twain's Huckleberry Fin from public libraries, i.e. since 
 somebody finds some content to be offensive lets get rid of it 
 irrespective of the overall true value or consideration for the fact 
 that the author has used the offensive language ON PURPOSE.

Personally, I find the ls command offensive.  It could show files with
nasty words in them.  This is about more than my adult view; I know
there are children forced by their parents to use OpenBSD, like little
Tom who lives a block over.

One option is to add a content filter directly inside the ls
command, so that it will simply skip those files.  Another variation
would be to add the support to the kernel itself, this would also help
other adirectory traversal code.  It might face significant kernel
growth.  Of course we would have to find a way to manage the nasty
word dictionary, and not expose it in the source tree in an open
fashion.  Blob, anyone?

If we make this change in the kernel, we also need to be sensitive
to the way that the NFS kernel code traverses directories.

For now, I have chosen a simpler solution.  (If this actually gets
commited, we could call it the final solution).

ok?

Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -p -u -r1.10 Makefile
--- Makefile18 May 2007 16:08:12 -  1.10
+++ Makefile22 Nov 2013 19:24:12 -
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 #  $OpenBSD: Makefile,v 1.10 2007/05/18 16:08:12 deraadt Exp $
 
 SUBDIR=cat chio chmod cp csh date dd df domainname echo \
-   ed expr hostname kill ksh ln ls md5 mkdir mt \
+   ed expr hostname kill ksh ln md5 mkdir mt \
mv pax ps pwd rcp rm rmail rmdir sleep stty \
sync systrace test
 
Index: ls/Makefile
===
RCS file: ls/Makefile
diff -N ls/Makefile
--- ls/Makefile 6 Aug 2003 19:09:09 -   1.7
+++ /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -
@@ -1,8 +0,0 @@
-#  $OpenBSD: Makefile,v 1.7 2003/08/06 19:09:09 tedu Exp $
-
-PROG=  ls
-SRCS=  cmp.c ls.c main.c print.c util.c
-DPADD= ${LIBUTIL}
-LDADD= -lutil
-
-.include bsd.prog.mk
Index: ls/cmp.c
===
RCS file: ls/cmp.c
diff -N ls/cmp.c
--- ls/cmp.c27 Oct 2009 23:59:21 -  1.6
+++ /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -
@@ -1,167 +0,0 @@
-/* $OpenBSD: cmp.c,v 1.6 2009/10/27 23:59:21 deraadt Exp $ */
-/* $NetBSD: cmp.c,v 1.10 1996/07/08 10:32:01 mycroft Exp $ */
-
-/*
- * Copyright (c) 1989, 1993
- * The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.
- *
- * This code is derived from software contributed to Berkeley by
- * Michael Fischbein.
- *
- * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
- * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
- * are met:
- * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
- *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
- * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
- *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
- *documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
- * 3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
- *may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
- *without specific prior written permission.
- *
- * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
- * ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
- * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
- * ARE DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
- * FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
- * DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
- * OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
- * HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
- * LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
- * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
- * SUCH DAMAGE.
- */
-
-#include sys/types.h
-#include sys/stat.h
-
-#include fts.h
-#include string.h
-
-#include ls.h
-#include extern.h
-
-int
-namecmp(const FTSENT *a, const FTSENT *b)
-{
-   return (strcmp(a-fts_name, b-fts_name));
-}
-
-int
-revnamecmp(const FTSENT *a, const FTSENT *b)
-{
-   return (strcmp(b-fts_name, a-fts_name));
-}
-
-int

Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Theo de Raadt
  I don't see it that way.  Huckleberry Finn is a book, and I don't need
  to read it unless I want to.  The spamd(8) man page is a man page I need
  to read in order to understand how to use spamd.
 
 Let me fix that for you:
 
 The spamd(8) man page is a man page I don't need to read it unless I
 want to use spamd, a choice I am making of my own free will, and if I
 don't like it, I guess I could just go use some other software that
 doesn't get my panties in a bunch.
 
 Maybe you could try spam assassin instead? Unless, of course, you find
 the metaphor of killing spam offensive...

http://spamassassin.apache.org/tests_3_0_x.html 

He might be out of luck.  There might not be software to do this,
without being offended.  In which case it probably falls back to the
manual method...



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Jan Stary
On Nov 21 20:04:32, gil...@poolp.org wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 08:02:06PM +0100, za...@gmx.com wrote:
  Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it
  would be better to remove anything that is controversial, for
  whatever reason

You emails are controversial, apparently.
Remove them, just to be on the safe side.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Mikkel C. Simonsen

J. Lewis Muir wrote:

If it's somehow offensive to them
and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.


If everybody adapts what they say, to what they think others want to 
hear, then we no longer have freedom of speach. Everybody looses.


But then I live in a country that, unlike the USA, actually has freedom 
of speach...


Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Alexander Hall

On 11/22/13 20:09, J. Lewis Muir wrote:

On 11/22/13 12:34 PM, System Administrator wrote:

Hi J. Lewis,

I am not a developer, but I've been lurking on this list for a very
long time and on that basis can tell you that you've committed two
cardinal sins as far as this mailing list is concerned:

1) you failed to do your homework -- had you done some research, in
particular about the OpenBSD development philosophy, you would know
that


Hi, Jacob.

It's unclear to me exactly what homework you think I failed to do.  I am
aware of and like lots of things that the OpenBSD project strives for.


2) OpenBSD is the ultimate volunteer effort -- the developers do
it in their free time FOR PERSONAL FUN. Many of them have made
it very clear that they would cease development if it stops being
fun. Your original message (title and intro) goes to the heart of this
issue. Its tone and attitude is no different than the efforts in the
Bible Belt to ban Mark Twain's Huckleberry Fin from public libraries,
i.e. since somebody finds some content to be offensive lets get rid
of it irrespective of the overall true value or consideration for the
fact that the author has used the offensive language ON PURPOSE.


I don't see it that way.  Huckleberry Finn is a book, and I don't need
to read it unless I want to.  The spamd(8) man page is a man page I need
to read in order to understand how to use spamd.  And if the author of
the spamd(8) man page did use the offensive language on purpose and
thinks it's important to keep it that way, I would accept that.  I'd
disagree, but I'd accept that.  But it seems the author doesn't think
it's so important either way.  So, I don't get the strong resistance.


I'm pretty sure Bob has noticed (and likely quite some time ago ignored) 
this conversation.


You made your point and argumented for it. It does not apply here 
though, so stop. Now. Please.


/Alexander



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Gilles Chehade
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:48:02PM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote:

 I'm pretty sure Bob has noticed (and likely quite some time ago
 ignored) this conversation.
 
 You made your point and argumented for it. It does not apply here
 though, so stop. Now. Please.
 

Actually, the longer it runs, the bigger my shitlist to test some
filters grows :-P


-- 
Gilles Chehade

https://www.poolp.org  @poolpOrg



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Constantine A. Murenin
On 22 November 2013 10:06, J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org wrote:
 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
 If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
 the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
 happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
 of November, every year.

 Hi, Giancarlo.

 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.

 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

 Lewis

Yet, (0), you're not the one who wrote this software, or, in fact, any
other *BSD software that I could find, so I'm not sure you're
empirically qualified to make the claim about authorship that you're
now making, and, (1), what makes you think that your patch doesn't
hurt the clarity of the man-page in any way?

C.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Eric Johnson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013, J. Lewis Muir wrote:

 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
  If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
  the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
  happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
  of November, every year.
 
 Hi, Giancarlo.
 
 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.
 
 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

I don't know about others, but I tend to say something that offends others 
far more often than others saying something that offends me.  It's not 
that I intend to offend people -- in many cases I have no idea why they 
were offended.  For the most part, I've given up worrying about it.

Eric



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Michael Motyka
On Nov 22, 2013, at 10:06 AM, J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org wrote:

 On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
 If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
 the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
 happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
 of November, every year.
 
 Hi, Giancarlo.
 
 Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
 while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
 but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.
 
 I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
 wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
 considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
 me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
 asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
 page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
 I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
 example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
 and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
 patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.
 
 Lewis
 
It looks like a pretty one-sided deal you're proposing: passive-aggressive 
moves to control the speech of those who have respected your freedom to express 
your opinion and be heard. Pretty damned selfish behavior on your part as far 
as I can tell.

If I had the skill, time and energy to generate a patch it would be for 
something that's actually broken and in need of fixing.

M



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Theo de Raadt
 It looks like a pretty one-sided deal you're proposing:
 passive-aggressive moves to control the speech of those who have
 respected your freedom to express your opinion and be heard. Pretty
 damned selfish behavior on your part as far as I can tell.

Michael -- well said.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-22 Thread Jason Barbier

On 11/22/2013 10:50 AM, Rick Pettit wrote:

Lewis,

If censorship is your thing, why don’t you start by censoring yourself.

What you are asking for here is offensive.

-Rick

+1


On Nov 22, 2013, at 12:26 PM, Paolo Aglialoro paol...@gmail.com wrote:


Il 22/nov/2013 19:07 J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org ha scritto:

On 11/22/13 11:17 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:

If it's offensive for you, compile your own spamd man page with
the diff you so happily provided, and live the rest of your life
happy. Remember to always take this pill again on 1st of May, and 1st
of November, every year.

Hi, Giancarlo.

Well, no one wants to maintain a patch forever.  I'd maintain it for a
while if there was a good chance it would get accepted at some point,
but if there's no chance, then I wouldn't bother.

I'm a little puzzled over the whole resistance to the patch.  If I
wrote a man page for some software I wrote, and if an example in it was
considered off-color by someone, and that someone submitted a patch to
me to change it slightly to no longer be off-color to them, and they
asked in a kind way, and the patch didn't hurt the clarity of the man
page in any way, I would likely accept the patch.  How am I hurt by it?
I may not agree with the person, but why would I insist on keeping an
example that seems off-color to them?  If it's somehow offensive to them
and can be changed in a small way not to be, then I would accept the
patch to change it.  Everybody wins--no big deal.

Lewis

+1




Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Nick Holland

On 11/21/2013 12:33 PM, J. Lewis Muir wrote:

I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the spamd(8)
man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the choice, I'd
choose to read the man page without the adult content.  Here's a patch
against -current that replaces the adult examples with cleaner
alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this patch?


you want really dirty smut?  We got LAWYERS e-mail addresses in the man 
pages.  Talk about something to keep the kids away from...


I don't think that's gonna fly.
Those particular ones almost qualify as a signature -- anyone who's 
worked with the project for a while will look at those and say, Oh, I 
know who wrote this!


Stuff like this is part of the fun for people developing OpenBSD (and 
hopefully, fun for some of the users).  Please understand that we don't 
want anyone to take away our fun.


As someone who works in a professional environment, where results 
don't matter as long as the word Enterprise grade is attached to the 
product, and security is important, as long as it doesn't get in the way 
of ANYTHING else, and failure is fine, as long as there's an outside 
company you can blame it on, a little unprofessionalism is a relief.


Nick.



[fwd jlm...@imca-cat.org: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page]

2013-11-21 Thread Chris Cappuccio
- Forwarded message from J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org -

Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:33:41 -0600
From: J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the spamd(8)
man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the choice, I'd
choose to read the man page without the adult content.  Here's a patch
against -current that replaces the adult examples with cleaner
alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this patch?

Thanks,

Lewis

Index: libexec/spamd/spamd.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/libexec/spamd/spamd.8,v
retrieving revision 1.119
diff -u -p -r1.119 spamd.8
--- libexec/spamd/spamd.8   27 Sep 2012 20:12:32 -  1.119
+++ libexec/spamd/spamd.8   21 Nov 2013 16:50:06 -
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ For example, if
 .Pa spamd.alloweddomains
 contains:
 .Bd -literal -offset indent
-@humpingforjesus.com
+@top1marketing.com
 obtuse.com
 .Ed
 .Pp
@@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ The following destination addresses
 .Em would not
 cause the sending host to be trapped:
 .Bd -literal -offset indent
-beardedcl...@humpingforjesus.com
+f...@top1marketing.com
 b...@obtuse.com
 b...@snouts.obtuse.com
 .Ed
@@ -432,8 +432,8 @@ However the following addresses
 .Em would
 cause the sending host to be trapped:
 .Bd -literal -offset indent
-pe...@apostles.humpingforjesus.com
-bigbu...@bofh.ucs.ualberta.ca
+cu...@stooges.top1marketing.com
+win...@bofh.ucs.ualberta.ca
 .Ed
 .Pp
 A low priority MX IP address may be specified with the

- End forwarded message -

-- 
It was the Nicolatians who first coined the separation between lay and clergy.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread zalit

On 2013-11-21 20:04, Gilles Chehade wrote:

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 08:02:06PM +0100, za...@gmx.com wrote:

Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it
would be better to remove anything that is controversial, for
whatever reason -- even if in *my* concept of morality there was
nothing wrong with it.



I feel offended by those who feel offended about some man page.
Maybe we should remove them as they are causing controversy ?


A reasonable person is the one who takes into consideration others, 
among other things. Yes, you can take that defying attitude, but it does 
not seem very constructive in the context of a community, such as the 
OpenBSD community, where people are trying to achieve something useful. 
Bickering about silly things is not constructive at all.
The best guideline with regard to similar matters is that of AVOIDING 
bike shedding issues.




Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Theo de Raadt
 Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it would 
 be better to remove anything that is controversial, for whatever reason 
 -- even if in *my* concept of morality there was nothing wrong with it.

The people who write code get to decide how they document it.  If
someone doesn't like it, don't have to use it.  They can walk away.

But above all, the principle is simple.  If such persons use the
software, they are BEYOND CRITICISM.  Even the manual pages have a
disclaimer that makes this clear:

.\ THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR
.\ IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES
.\ OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
.\ IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT,
.\ INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT
.\ NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
.\ DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
.\ THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
.\ (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF
.\ THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

Don't like it?  Then walk away.

To take this back to the original complaint, being critical of Bob's
Charity at writing the software and documentation is UN-CHRISTIAN.  Or is
it?  Is this some fake morality where your sensibilities override the
original charity?

The complaint is deeply offensive to any sense of right and wrong, in
effectively every culture.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Shawn K. Quinn
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013, at 11:33 AM, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
 I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the spamd(8)
 man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the choice, I'd
 choose to read the man page without the adult content.  Here's a patch
 against -current that replaces the adult examples with cleaner
 alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this patch?

The OpenBSD man pages are not a Disney movie. For that matter, neither
is most of the rest of the world, or the Internet.

If you deal at all with spam on the Internet, you will see far, far
worse than that. Actually, even if you somehow manage to not get a
single piece of spam, you'll see far worse things from time to time on
this mailing list right here.

I like bigbu...@bofh.ucs.ualberta.ca and I cannot lie.

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Alexander Hall

On 11/21/13 21:44, J. Lewis Muir wrote:

On 11/21/13 2:12 PM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013, at 11:33 AM, J. Lewis Muir wrote:

I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the
spamd(8) man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the
choice, I'd choose to read the man page without the adult content.
Here's a patch against -current that replaces the adult examples with
cleaner alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this
patch?


The OpenBSD man pages are not a Disney movie. For that matter, neither
is most of the rest of the world, or the Internet.

If you deal at all with spam on the Internet, you will see far, far
worse than that. Actually, even if you somehow manage to not get a
single piece of spam, you'll see far worse things from time to time on
this mailing list right here.


Hi, Shawn.

I understand that, and I'm not trying to tell people how they should
talk on a mailing list.  But to me documentation for a project like
OpenBSD is different.  It's not individual people talking however they
like to talk.  It's well-written text intended for users to read to
understand some part of the OpenBSD operating system.  I don't know of
other OpenBSD user-facing documentation (i.e. website, man pages, etc.)
that has off-color (at least to me) content.


I'm vegan, but I can cope with this:

$ zgrep -rw deadbeef /usr/share/man/
/usr/share/man/man1/perlembed.1:\deadbeef
/usr/share/man/man1/perlfaq5.1:\# Pity the poor deadbeef.
/usr/share/man/man5/bgpd.conf.5:tcp md5sig key deadbeef

/Alexander



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread J. Lewis Muir
On 11/21/13 2:12 PM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 21, 2013, at 11:33 AM, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
 I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the
 spamd(8) man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the
 choice, I'd choose to read the man page without the adult content.
 Here's a patch against -current that replaces the adult examples with
 cleaner alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this
 patch?

 The OpenBSD man pages are not a Disney movie. For that matter, neither
 is most of the rest of the world, or the Internet.

 If you deal at all with spam on the Internet, you will see far, far
 worse than that. Actually, even if you somehow manage to not get a
 single piece of spam, you'll see far worse things from time to time on
 this mailing list right here.

Hi, Shawn.

I understand that, and I'm not trying to tell people how they should
talk on a mailing list.  But to me documentation for a project like
OpenBSD is different.  It's not individual people talking however they
like to talk.  It's well-written text intended for users to read to
understand some part of the OpenBSD operating system.  I don't know of
other OpenBSD user-facing documentation (i.e. website, man pages, etc.)
that has off-color (at least to me) content.

Thanks,

Lewis



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Shawn K. Quinn
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013, at 01:51 PM, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
 I was just wishing I didn't have to read a few examples that to me 
 were off-color.

Honestly, those examples are no worse than 'Gnomovision' (which makes
passes at compilers). You haven't begun to see off-color until you've
seen some of the spam out there.

 To me it was requesting a small improvement to the documentation, 
 for which I did the work and submitted a patch.  I was hoping it 
 wouldn't really matter much to anyone, and then I wouldn't be bothered 
 by the examples anymore.

It's good you submitted a patch. But apparently it does matter a whole
lot to some people, and honestly, to me it's the principle of the thing
more than anything else.

You really want to see off-color? Run these two commands. Prepare to
faint.

$ find /usr/src -type f | xargs grep -w fuck
$ find /usr/src -type f | xargs grep -w shit

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Alexander Hall

On 11/21/13 20:51, J. Lewis Muir wrote:


I do like the software; that's why I was reading about it.  And I like
the documentation too; I think it's very good.  I was not intending to
be critical of the documentation; rather, I was just wishing I didn't
have to read a few examples that to me were off-color.  To me it was
requesting a small improvement to the documentation, for which I did the
work and submitted a patch.  I was hoping it wouldn't really matter much
to anyone, and then I wouldn't be bothered by the examples anymore.


Hi J,

You expressed your feelings. I don't agree, but that's fine.

You submitted a diff. That's good. Talk is cheap, etc.

However, as you noticed, it just won't happen.

Case closed.

/Alexander



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Janne Johansson
2013/11/21 J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org

 On 11/21/13 12:23 PM, Nick Holland wrote:
  Stuff like this is part of the fun for people developing OpenBSD (and
  hopefully, fun for some of the users).  Please understand that we
  don't want anyone to take away our fun.

 Hi, Nick.

 I understand the concept of fun within a project, and I'm all for that;
 I'm not trying to take away fun.  However, I find this particular fun to
 be vulgar and would rather not read it in documentation if possible.



If you work with mail servers and try to stop spam and _that_ offends you,
you will be in for a treat.
That is _peanuts_ compared to the content of the spam you are supposed to
filter out.


-- 
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Brad Smith

On 21/11/13 2:15 PM, za...@gmx.com wrote:

On 2013-11-21 20:04, Gilles Chehade wrote:

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 08:02:06PM +0100, za...@gmx.com wrote:

Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it
would be better to remove anything that is controversial, for
whatever reason -- even if in *my* concept of morality there was
nothing wrong with it.



I feel offended by those who feel offended about some man page.
Maybe we should remove them as they are causing controversy ?


A reasonable person is the one who takes into consideration others,
among other things. Yes, you can take that defying attitude, but it does
not seem very constructive in the context of a community, such as the
OpenBSD community, where people are trying to achieve something useful.
Bickering about silly things is not constructive at all.
The best guideline with regard to similar matters is that of AVOIDING
bike shedding issues.


This is a useless discussion about silly things and is not constructive 
at all.


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Chris Cappuccio
Shawn K. Quinn [skqu...@rushpost.com] wrote:
 
 $ find /usr/src -type f | xargs grep -w fuck
 $ find /usr/src -type f | xargs grep -w shit
 

find -type f ? How about just grep -r ?



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Todd Alan Smith
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:33 AM, J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org wrote:

 I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the spamd(8)
 man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the choice, I'd
 choose to read the man page without the adult content.  Here's a patch
 against -current that replaces the adult examples with cleaner
 alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this patch?

 Thanks,

 Lewis

 Index: libexec/spamd/spamd.8
 ===
 RCS file: /cvs/src/libexec/spamd/spamd.8,v
 retrieving revision 1.119
 diff -u -p -r1.119 spamd.8
 --- libexec/spamd/spamd.8   27 Sep 2012 20:12:32 -  1.119
 +++ libexec/spamd/spamd.8   21 Nov 2013 16:50:06 -
 @@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ For example, if
  .Pa spamd.alloweddomains
  contains:
  .Bd -literal -offset indent
 -@humpingforjesus.com
 +@top1marketing.com


I'd prefer to read the man page without encountering references to
top1marketing. Widely-appreciated humor is a difficult thing to construct;
however, referencing the Stooges is a good start.



Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread J. Lewis Muir
I found some of the example email addresses and domains in the spamd(8)
man page to be somewhat adult in nature.  If given the choice, I'd
choose to read the man page without the adult content.  Here's a patch
against -current that replaces the adult examples with cleaner
alternatives.  Would a developer be willing to accept this patch?

Thanks,

Lewis

Index: libexec/spamd/spamd.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/libexec/spamd/spamd.8,v
retrieving revision 1.119
diff -u -p -r1.119 spamd.8
--- libexec/spamd/spamd.8   27 Sep 2012 20:12:32 -  1.119
+++ libexec/spamd/spamd.8   21 Nov 2013 16:50:06 -
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ For example, if
 .Pa spamd.alloweddomains
 contains:
 .Bd -literal -offset indent
-@humpingforjesus.com
+@top1marketing.com
 obtuse.com
 .Ed
 .Pp
@@ -423,7 +423,7 @@ The following destination addresses
 .Em would not
 cause the sending host to be trapped:
 .Bd -literal -offset indent
-beardedcl...@humpingforjesus.com
+f...@top1marketing.com
 b...@obtuse.com
 b...@snouts.obtuse.com
 .Ed
@@ -432,8 +432,8 @@ However the following addresses
 .Em would
 cause the sending host to be trapped:
 .Bd -literal -offset indent
-pe...@apostles.humpingforjesus.com
-bigbu...@bofh.ucs.ualberta.ca
+cu...@stooges.top1marketing.com
+win...@bofh.ucs.ualberta.ca
 .Ed
 .Pp
 A low priority MX IP address may be specified with the



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Wayne Oliver
On 21 Nov 2013, at 21:04, Gilles Chehade gil...@poolp.org wrote:

 On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 08:02:06PM +0100, za...@gmx.com wrote:
 Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it
 would be better to remove anything that is controversial, for
 whatever reason -- even if in *my* concept of morality there was
 nothing wrong with it.
 
 
 I feel offended by those who feel offended about some man page.
 Maybe we should remove them as they are causing controversy ?

Amen!

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had 
a name of signature.asc]



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Theo de Raadt
 On 11/21/13 12:23 PM, Nick Holland wrote:
  Stuff like this is part of the fun for people developing OpenBSD (and
  hopefully, fun for some of the users).  Please understand that we
  don't want anyone to take away our fun.
 
 Hi, Nick.
 
 I understand the concept of fun within a project, and I'm all for that;
 I'm not trying to take away fun.  However, I find this particular fun to
 be vulgar and would rather not read it in documentation if possible.

Too bad.  You can use other software.

I decided to make a guess as to the region you are from.  I guessed
right.  That kind of attitude is largely extinct, and remains in only
a few backwards regions of the planet.

Your request is ridiculous.

I'm going to go out on a limb and point these pages out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemont,_Illinois
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prude

We'll probably get a complaint from Saudia Arabia next about a time
related man page...



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread zalit
Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it would 
be better to remove anything that is controversial, for whatever reason 
-- even if in *my* concept of morality there was nothing wrong with it.




Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread J. Lewis Muir
On 11/21/13 12:23 PM, Nick Holland wrote:
 Stuff like this is part of the fun for people developing OpenBSD (and
 hopefully, fun for some of the users).  Please understand that we
 don't want anyone to take away our fun.

Hi, Nick.

I understand the concept of fun within a project, and I'm all for that;
I'm not trying to take away fun.  However, I find this particular fun to
be vulgar and would rather not read it in documentation if possible.

Thanks,

Lewis



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Theo de Raadt
 A reasonable person is the one who takes into consideration others, 
 among other things.

Yes, take into consider others, LIKE THE AUTHOR.  Who, if you'll
notice the copyright notice, is the premier other to be taken into
consideration.  I see gmx.com and yet you seem to know little of the
moral rights of the author?  The community standards don't include
burning books, which is what removing those comments from his manual
page would be equivelant to.

 Yes, you can take that defying attitude, but it does 
 not seem very constructive in the context of a community, such as the 
 OpenBSD community, where people are trying to achieve something useful. 

The only person who did something useful, is the author of the
software.  He wrote it.

Everyone else is just a freeloader -- including me, when I use this
software.

By using his software, I am not achieving anything useful in a
community form.  I'm just a user.  So you are you.  Unless I have an
improvement to the software written up, I am just a user.

Your context of the community sentence equates developers and users
in a way similar to calling a tourist walking a sidewalk in a
different country as trying to achieve something useful.  Oh boy,
such massive added value...

There is a user community, and a development community.  You forget
your place -- especially when you reply to gilles, who has written the
other major mail-delivery related piece of software in the tree.

 Bickering about silly things is not constructive at all.
 The best guideline with regard to similar matters is that of AVOIDING 
 bike shedding issues.

Listen to yourself, proud of the complex words you found in a
dictionary.  context of the community.  What a load of uptight bull.

You, sir, forgot your place, and should walk away.



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread J. Lewis Muir
On 11/21/13 1:11 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
 Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe
 it would be better to remove anything that is controversial, for
 whatever reason -- even if in *my* concept of morality there was
 nothing wrong with it.
 
 The people who write code get to decide how they document it.  If
 someone doesn't like it, don't have to use it.  They can walk away.

 But above all, the principle is simple.  If such persons use the
 software, they are BEYOND CRITICISM.  Even the manual pages have a
 disclaimer that makes this clear:
 
 .\ THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS
 .\ OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED
 .\ WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
 .\ PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE
 .\ FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR
 .\ CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT
 .\ OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
 .\ OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY
 .\ OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
 .\ (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE
 .\ USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
 .\ DAMAGE.
 
 Don't like it?  Then walk away.
 
 To take this back to the original complaint, being critical of Bob's
 Charity at writing the software and documentation is UN-CHRISTIAN.  Or
 is it?  Is this some fake morality where your sensibilities override
 the original charity?

Hi, Theo.

I do like the software; that's why I was reading about it.  And I like
the documentation too; I think it's very good.  I was not intending to
be critical of the documentation; rather, I was just wishing I didn't
have to read a few examples that to me were off-color.  To me it was
requesting a small improvement to the documentation, for which I did the
work and submitted a patch.  I was hoping it wouldn't really matter much
to anyone, and then I wouldn't be bothered by the examples anymore.

Thanks,

Lewis



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Gilles Chehade
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 08:02:06PM +0100, za...@gmx.com wrote:
 Different people have different concepts of morality. I believe it
 would be better to remove anything that is controversial, for
 whatever reason -- even if in *my* concept of morality there was
 nothing wrong with it.
 

I feel offended by those who feel offended about some man page.
Maybe we should remove them as they are causing controversy ?

-- 
Gilles Chehade

https://www.poolp.org  @poolpOrg



Re: Patch to remove adult content from spamd(8) man page

2013-11-21 Thread Ted Unangst
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 21:47, Alexander Hall wrote:
 
 I'm vegan, but I can cope with this:
 
 $ zgrep -rw deadbeef /usr/share/man/
 /usr/share/man/man1/perlembed.1:\deadbeef
 /usr/share/man/man1/perlfaq5.1:\# Pity the poor deadbeef.
 /usr/share/man/man5/bgpd.conf.5:tcp md5sig key deadbeef

Don't forget /usr/share/games/fortune/recipes!
(Which I notice can also be blamed on Bob. Sensing a pattern here...)