It was difficult for me not to quote your text. It was really tempting! ;-)
Be that as it may, you perfectly summarized the discussion.
--
Nikos
> >Would you prefer the Torah, the Koran, or perhaps the
> > Apocrypha? I'm sure we could get volunteers to package those as
> > well.
Yes! I love packages like that. An operating system is an all purpose tool
and one of those purposes is research so I appreciate packages with reference
mat
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:05:34PM +0200, Nikos wrote:
> I would like to understand why you are so aggressive with me ("crusade"
> is aggressive).
I think I can explain this. You see, this issue has been discussed
before (with these exact packages as examples, in fact), and people
_have_ gotten
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:05:34PM +0200, Nikos wrote:
> > By the way, why does it hurt to have non-technical documents in an
> > operating system? If non-technical documents are banned, the same should
> > be done for other non-technical stuff, like games. I'm sure you wouldn't
> > like that.
>
I won't answer individually today (08/04/2003). You are too numerous!
I will begin by some minor answers (if you didn't answer the topic, you can
go directly to the line, about 60 lines underneath):
>> But they are very easy to retrieve and save with every web browser.
> And then forgotten
Em Tue, 8 Apr 2003 04:24:07 +0300, Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escreveu:
> [1] Ur-Quan Masters is a refreshing change from this perspective.
> I highly recommend it. Or I will, once it releases a stable version.
Yeah! One of the best games ever! It was the one that made me eager to
lea
Nikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I typed "king james bible" in Google and hit "I'm feeling lucky". I was
> browsing the text 1 second later...
Not long ago slashdot had a story about how easy it was to redefine a
term acording to google. Granted it would probally take a bit longer
to redefine
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:21:00PM +0200, Nikos wrote:
> >> Are the ideas in these packages xenophobic?
> >
> > Heh, if we were going to reject packages with xenophobic ideas, we'd
> > lose most of the games. xgalaga, anyone?
>
> I don't agree. Xenophobia is a too unfortunate and serious subject
(I'm still speaking from my own viewpoint here. You will find that
Debian is a beast that speaks with many voices :-)
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:21:09PM +0200, Nikos wrote:
> You are right, the Bible, or the collected works of Shakespeare, are
> important pieces for culture. But they have nothin
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Nikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard
to say:
[snip]
> > in this case it's the King James Bible, which is a
> > very useful text for a large number of people (it is, after all, the
> > most widely read book in the world).
>
> You're right, although this
>> On Mon, 07 Apr 2003 21:21:15 +0200,
>> Nikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I typed "king james bible" in Google and hit "I'm feeling lucky". I
> was browsing the text 1 second later...
Tell me how to do that when I am answering email from a plane
32k feet up there.
Assumin
>> On Mon, 7 Apr 2003 08:50:18 -0500,
>> Brooks R Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Would you prefer the Torah, the Koran, or perhaps the
> Apocrypha? I'm sure we could get volunteers to package those as
> well.
> Hmmm?
OK. If some of these packages are large, they may have
>> On Mon, 07 Apr 2003 21:21:09 +0200,
>> Nikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> You are right, the Bible, or the collected works of Shakespeare,
> are important pieces for culture. But they have nothing to do in an
> operating system!
Neither does fortune. Or vi. (We have emacs already)
Thus spoke Nikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 2003-04-07 21:21:15:
> > Because someone packaged them, and someone uses (installed)
> > them. Whether it is easy to find on the web, is irrelevant, as there
> > are still people who are not connected 24/7, and prefer to install a
> > package, and read it off
On Monday 07 April 2003 12:21 pm, Nikos wrote:
> >> Are the ideas in these packages xenophobic?
> >
> > Heh, if we were going to reject packages with xenophobic ideas, we'd
> > lose most of the games. xgalaga, anyone?
>
> I don't agree. Xenophobia is a too unfortunate and serious subject to laugh
> You are right, the Bible, or the collected works of Shakespeare, are
> important pieces for culture. But they have nothing to do in an operating
> system! Why to privilege one religion or political opinion? How to
> distinguish "useful" (as David Nusinow said) or useless texts? It's simply
> I don't know about anarchism (never looked at it), but from my
> point of view, bible-kjv-text is in there because it's useful
> reference material. I would support packaging, e.g., the
> collected works of Shakespeare for the same reason. bible-kjv
> is a program for searching through bible-kj
> Are the ideas in these packages xenophobic?
I never said that, I took an excessive example in order to make my ideas
clearer.
> The anarchism package isn't
> really. Whether or not you think that Debian is an example of anarchism
> in action is irrelevant when you consider the fact that many o
> Because someone packaged them, and someone uses (installed)
> them. Whether it is easy to find on the web, is irrelevant, as there
> are still people who are not connected 24/7, and prefer to install a
> package, and read it offline.
But they are very easy to retrieve and save with every web bro
>> Are the ideas in these packages xenophobic?
>
> Heh, if we were going to reject packages with xenophobic ideas, we'd
> lose most of the games. xgalaga, anyone?
I don't agree. Xenophobia is a too unfortunate and serious subject to laugh
with it: we can't say that galaga is xenophobic, because
> Greetings,
> Would you prefer the Torah, the Koran, or perhaps the Apocrypha? I'm sure
> we could get volunteers to package those as well.
>
> Hmmm?
No, that's not the main problem. As I already said, I think such texts have
nothing to do in an operating system.
--
Nikos
| Hello,
| I don't understand why the packages anarchism, bible-kjv and
| bible-kjv-text (in section doc) are Debian packages. They are no
| technical documentation, they don't correspond (in my eyes) to
| open source's philosophy, they can be easily found on the WWW...
| Thanks for your comments a
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 03:36:24PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> point of view, bible-kjv-text is in there because it's useful
> reference material. I would support packaging, e.g., the
It's also data for the bible-kjv package.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream -
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 05:07:47AM -0700, David Nusinow wrote:
> Are the ideas in these packages xenophobic?
Heh, if we were going to reject packages with xenophobic ideas, we'd
lose most of the games. xgalaga, anyone?
Richard Braakman
On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 11:01:45PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't understand why the packages anarchism, bible-kjv and
> bible-kjv-text (in section doc) are Debian packages. They are no
> technical documentation, they don't correspond (in my eyes) to open
> source's philosophy, they can
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 10:17:15AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Because somebody packaged them.
>
> Do you accept any package? Fortunately not! You don't accept any for
> technical reasons (for example, in the Debian Weekly News issued February
> 18th, 2003, it was considered to remove a
> I don't understand why the packages anarchism, bible-kjv and
> bible-kjv-text (in section doc) are Debian packages. They are no
> technical documentation, they don't correspond (in my eyes) to open
> source's philosophy, they can be easily found on the WWW...
Because someone packaged them, and s
Hello,
> All the dictionary packages are not technical documentation and
> don't correspond to open source philosophy. And all the linux
> gazette packages, there are others too...
Apart from the three packages I've quoted before, all the doc packages are
technical ones or correspond to open sou
On Sat Apr 05, 11:01pm +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't understand why the packages anarchism, bible-kjv and bible-kjv-text
> (in section doc) are Debian packages.
Because somebody packaged them.
pgppoMT0J6cAF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Hello,
> I don't understand why the packages anarchism, bible-kjv and bible-kjv-text
> (in section doc) are Debian packages. They are no technical documentation,
> they don't correspond (in my eyes) to open source's philosophy, they can be
> easily found on the WWW...
Hey Nikos,
All the dict
Hello,
I don't understand why the packages anarchism, bible-kjv and bible-kjv-text (in
section doc) are Debian packages. They are no technical documentation, they
don't correspond (in my eyes) to open source's philosophy, they can be easily
found on the WWW...
Thanks for your comments and answer
31 matches
Mail list logo
