Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #13044 > unrolled thread

Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

Contents

  Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-11-19 16:10 +0100
    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2022-11-19 17:40 +0100
    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org> - 2022-11-19 17:40 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-19 21:50 +0100
        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-11-19 22:10 +0100
        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org> - 2022-11-19 23:20 +0100
          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 01:00 +0100
            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 12:00 +0100
              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 14:20 +0100
              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 21:50 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 22:30 +0100
                  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Michael Neuffer <neuffer@neuffer.com> - 2022-11-20 23:00 +0100
                    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 23:30 +0100
                      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Michael Neuffer <neuffer@neuffer.com> - 2022-11-21 00:50 +0100
                        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2022-11-21 01:00 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 03:20 +0100
                            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 08:10 +0100
                            Aw: Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Steffen Möller <steffen_moeller@gmx.de> - 2022-11-21 16:10 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 03:20 +0100
                            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-11-21 08:10 +0100
                            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-22 04:50 +0100
                        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 17:40 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 18:00 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Hanno 'Rince' Wagner <wagner@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 18:10 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 19:10 +0100
                      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2022-11-21 03:10 +0100
                      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 03:10 +0100
                  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 11:40 +0100
                    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> - 2022-12-14 00:00 +0100
                      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-12-14 10:10 +0100
                        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2022-12-14 18:50 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-12-14 22:40 +0100
                        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2022-12-14 23:10 +0100
                      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-12-14 10:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 00:50 +0100
                  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 06:00 +0100
                  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 08:10 +0100
                    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Sam Hartman <hartmans@suchdamage.org> - 2022-11-21 16:10 +0100
                      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 21:30 +0100
                        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? nick black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 23:00 +0100
                        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-11-22 06:50 +0100
                          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2022-12-17 20:20 +0100
                            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-12-18 23:20 +0100
                              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-12-19 06:30 +0100
                              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-12-19 17:40 +0100
                              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2022-12-20 18:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 11:40 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-11-21 23:10 +0100
        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-11-22 07:00 +0100
        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Alexander Reichle-Schmehl <alexander@alphamar.org> - 2022-11-22 10:50 +0100
    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Judit Foglszinger <urbec@riseup.net> - 2022-11-20 12:00 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Ansgar <ansgar@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 12:20 +0100
        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? David Prévot <david@tilapin.org> - 2022-11-20 15:50 +0100
    Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 21:50 +0100
      Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-11-20 22:00 +0100
        Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 22:30 +0100
        Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 00:00 +0100
        Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2022-11-21 03:10 +0100
      Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 23:40 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#13090

On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 07:58:38PM -0600, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> 
> [3] Still called "FTP masters"[4].  Even long after FTP is deprecated
>     and Git repositories the world over have gotten their main branches
>     renamed to avoid terminology redolent of unjust power inequities,
>     we'll cling to our antiquated terms to the bitter end, won't we?
> 
While we're on the subject, I'd vote for "SCP Czars" (yes I am aware
that "Tsar" is the preferred/more common spelling in English, but I
think that the natural prononciation of "Czar" has better concord with
"SCP") or perhaps "Rsync Emirs".  If we want to be forward looking and
anticipate a future where we are uploading with a simple Git tag, then
we could also throw "Git Shahs" into the mix.

Actually, forget it, I'm all in on "Git Shahs".  I don't think we'd be
able to conjure up a better double entendre.  Of course, if anyone has
other suggestions, let's hear them.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13083

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:07:53AM +0100, Michael Neuffer wrote:
> As it was an NMU, this should be easily rectified.
> Don't let cancel culture win.

Indeed; my action is not irreversible.

Anyone who has a problem with what I did and believes I should be
censured or subject to some other form of disciplinary process, please
just go ahead and do it, don't beat about the bush.

Anyone who wants to put their name to explicitly racist, sexist and
pro-nazi material in Debian is free to re-upload it.

-- 

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13084

>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> writes:

    Jonathan> Anyone who has a problem with what I did and believes I
    Jonathan> should be censured or subject to some other form of
    Jonathan> disciplinary process, please just go ahead and do it,
    Jonathan> don't beat about the bush.

Hi.
I want to explicitly support your action.  You took a situation where
you thought there was a problem and fixed it.
I think that's great; as I mentioned elsewhere I think these sorts of
issues should generally be left up to the maintainer.

I would also support someone who as you said wanted to "put their name
to it," and maintain the package.
Even if someone does do that, I still support your action.  "Hey I think
this is junk and I don't see anyone maintaining it, so I'm removing it,"
is something we should encourage, not discourage.
As you pointed out, and I agree, if someone does want to put in the
effort, that's easy to solve.

Thanks for making Debian better,

--Sam

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13085

Hi,

On Mon, 21 Nov 2022, Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> Indeed; my action is not irreversible.

and that is a good thing.

> Anyone who wants to put their name to explicitly racist, sexist and
> pro-nazi material in Debian is free to re-upload it.

I would agree if _every_ quote in there would be pro-nazi or racist
(in every jurisdiction of the world) or sexist (in every jurisdiction
of the world).
It isn't.

the quotes may be bad-worded, offensive in some cultures, going
against someones believes - but not illegal in all jurisdictions.

So, please take this back and start being constructive again.

best regards, Hanno Wagner
-- 
|  Hanno Wagner  | Member of the HTML Writers Guild  | Rince@IRC      |
| Eine gewerbliche Nutzung meiner Email-Adressen ist nicht gestattet! |
| 74 a3 53 cc 0b 19 - we did it!          |    Generation @           |
#"Ich mache jetzt einen Dingsdown, aeh, einen Reboot."
#	-- marit@toppoint.de (Marit Hansen)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13086

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Jonathan,

Thank you for stepping forward to present yourself for potential
criticism in a discussion forum.  Unfortunately that is the only
laudable aspect I can locate in your message.

At 2022-11-21T15:39:24+0000, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:07:53AM +0100, Michael Neuffer wrote:
> > As it was an NMU, this should be easily rectified.
> > Don't let cancel culture win.
> 
> Indeed; my action is not irreversible.

It might in fact be; as I observed earlier, the archive administrators
have some power in this area as well.  But this does not absolve you of
responsibility, to the extent that their (in)action is a foreseeable
consequence of your own actions, particularly if they would regard it as
tedious if they had to deal with the package henceforth, and especially
if they can expect accusations of pro-racist, pro-sexist, and pro-Nazi
attitudes from people just like you if they defer to the wishes of the
uploader when a package is otherwise in technical good order, then you
retain considerable accountability.

> Anyone who has a problem with what I did and believes I should be
> censured or subject to some other form of disciplinary process, please
> just go ahead and do it, don't beat about the bush.

Why ever not?  Why should process be immediate?  If you have erred,
should you not have to worry about the possible consequences to yourself
forever more?  Would you not find it just for a racist, sexist, or Nazi
to endure the remainder of their life with a sword of Damocles dangling
over them?  Even if not just, wouldn't you find it satisfying?

> Anyone who wants to put their name to explicitly racist, sexist and
> pro-nazi material in Debian is free to re-upload it.

I see: you assert only one possible motivation, an inherently repulsive
one, for preserving the status quo ante, and offer yourself up as a
martyr to your noble cause of anti-prejudice.  What a sacrifice.  This
is civil disobedience as cosplay.

You cannot possibly be this simple-minded.  You are putting us on.  If
inspectors were to enter your home and catalogue all of the physical and
digital media in your possession, would they be correct to infer your
personal full-throated endorsement of every utterance they can find
within?  (Don't think you can escape punishment by pointing out
contradictions within such a notional corpus of propositions;
inquisitors curate, too, often to the disadvantage of the suspect.)

If I were your judge--which I am not--I would sentence you to produce
the equivalent of a master's thesis, say ~20,000 words in length, on one
of the following works of your choice, relating it to the processes and
culture of the Debian Project.

1.  _The Open Society and Its Enemies_, Karl Popper
2.  _The Origins of Totalitarianism_, Hannah Arendt
3.  _Doubt: A History_, Jennifer Michael Hecht
4.  _SCUM Manifesto_, Valerie Solanas
5.  _Mapplethorpe: A Biography_, Patricia Morrisroe

I would serve as your academic advisor but would not hold the authority
to claim your task fulfilled--instead, that would be done by a jury of
your peers; if, say, ten Debian developers[1], sponsored the inclusion
of your thesis in the distribution as a package.  (Possibly in non-free,
as I would not insist that your work product be Free Software...simply
that it be freely distributable, as in CC-BY-NC-ND.)

Fortunately for both of our time commitments, I am not empowered to
impose such a sentence.  You might nevertheless wish to consider
developing yourself as a person by reading at least one of the above
with sufficient attention to discuss it intelligently.  If you did, I'd
be interested to hear your thoughts.

Pluralism and diversity work not because everything heard or seen in a
society meets with approval by everyone all of the time; they work
because people practice toleration (contrast: approval) even of speech
or appearance that they find repugnant, because they understand that
their own words or physical presentation might be odious to some.

Regards,
Branden

[1] Thanks to Steve Langasek for suggesting this "unmotivated" number.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13070

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sunday, 20 November 2022 23:04:05 CET Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > > rational approach vs cancel culture: 1 vs 0
> > > <3
> > 
> > I can only very much agree to this.
> 
> I also wholly agree, alas it seems we already lost before this even
> started :(
> 
> https://tracker.debian.org/news/1385116/accepted-fortune-mod-11991-72-source
> -amd64-all-into-unstable/

This makes me incredibly sad :'(

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13072

On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 11:04:05PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 10:45:15PM +0100, Michael Neuffer wrote:
> > On 11/20/22 22:14, Roberto A. Foglietta wrote:
> > > On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 21:42, G. Branden Robinson
> > > <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Thank you for, perhaps inadvertently, compelling me to review some of
> > > > the content of the package.  I can now say that I am certain there is
> > > > material of worth in the fortunes-off package and support its retention
> > > > in the Debian distribution.  A review process for individual entries
> > > > that are incompatible with the project's values is manifest in the BTS.
> > > > 
> > > rational approach vs cancel culture: 1 vs 0
> > > <3
> > 
> > I can only very much agree to this.
> 
> I also wholly agree, alas it seems we already lost before this even
> started :(
> 
> https://tracker.debian.org/news/1385116/accepted-fortune-mod-11991-72-source-amd64-all-into-unstable/

Thanks $maintainer for not engaging in such an intellectual entertainment, and
for quietly doing the right thing here.

--
Tiago

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13080

"Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> wrote on 20/11/2022 at 22:14:35+0100:

> On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 21:42, G. Branden Robinson
> <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for, perhaps inadvertently, compelling me to review some of
>> the content of the package.  I can now say that I am certain there is
>> material of worth in the fortunes-off package and support its retention
>> in the Debian distribution.  A review process for individual entries
>> that are incompatible with the project's values is manifest in the BTS.
>>
>
> rational approach vs cancel culture: 1 vs 0
> <3

Cancel culture would be shaming those having done the content/package,
trying to hide it so that no one could see it (it's on GitHub and no one
here plans on having it removed from there) and burn on a bench anyone
asking for it to be back.

The mere thing I did is to state that it's garbage to me and it should
be thrown out from the archive because we have better stuff to do with
our free time.

Your answer: "cancel culture".

I guess it's supposed to be a "rational approach"? This is rich.

Regards,
-- 
PEB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13114

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:18:48AM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> wrote on 20/11/2022 at 22:14:35+0100:
> 
> > On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 21:42, G. Branden Robinson
> > <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Thank you for, perhaps inadvertently, compelling me to review some of
> >> the content of the package.  I can now say that I am certain there is
> >> material of worth in the fortunes-off package and support its retention
> >> in the Debian distribution.  A review process for individual entries
> >> that are incompatible with the project's values is manifest in the BTS.
> >>
> >
> > rational approach vs cancel culture: 1 vs 0
> > <3
> 
> Cancel culture would be shaming those having done the content/package,
> trying to hide it so that no one could see it (it's on GitHub and no one
> here plans on having it removed from there) and burn on a bench anyone
> asking for it to be back.
> 
> The mere thing I did is to state that it's garbage to me and it should
> be thrown out from the archive because we have better stuff to do with
> our free time.
> 
> Your answer: "cancel culture".
> 
> I guess it's supposed to be a "rational approach"? This is rich.

I think the bit of "rational approach" is to see *why* the package was
called "offensive" (because $DPL-of-a-long-time-ago decided that certain
subjects are offensive and they shouldn't be in the "regular" package),
and whether it actually results in a net positive (answer: probably not,
depending on your point of view).

If the "offensive" package were, in fact, mostly nazi and other such
similar content then you would have a point; but I in fact used to have
"fortune -o" in my .bashrc file, and, no, it really isn't. You might get
personally insulted occasionally, but that's about it (and if you can't
stand that, then, well, don't install the "offensive" package and/or
don't use the "-o" parameter to fortune -- I mean, there are *two*
barriers!).

Perhaps if there is something in the "offensive" package that we can
point to and declare really problematic, we can file bugs about that?
But just removing the whole package because "oh no" feels like the
baby/bathwater story and, yes, cancel culture.

-- 
     w@uter.{be,co.za}
wouter@{grep.be,fosdem.org,debian.org}

I will have a Tin-Actinium-Potassium mixture, thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13116

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 12:34:02AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:18:48AM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> wrote on 20/11/2022 at 22:14:35+0100:
> > 
> 
> I think the bit of "rational approach" is to see *why* the package was
> called "offensive" (because $DPL-of-a-long-time-ago decided that certain
> subjects are offensive and they shouldn't be in the "regular" package),
> and whether it actually results in a net positive (answer: probably not,
> depending on your point of view).
> 
> If the "offensive" package were, in fact, mostly nazi and other such
> similar content then you would have a point; but I in fact used to have
> "fortune -o" in my .bashrc file, and, no, it really isn't. You might get
> personally insulted occasionally, but that's about it (and if you can't
> stand that, then, well, don't install the "offensive" package and/or
> don't use the "-o" parameter to fortune -- I mean, there are *two*
> barriers!).
> 
> Perhaps if there is something in the "offensive" package that we can
> point to and declare really problematic, we can file bugs about that?
> But just removing the whole package because "oh no" feels like the
> baby/bathwater story and, yes, cancel culture.
> 

It's tagged that way in the BSDs and in the GitHub repository which seems
to be *most* of the upstream. It's an open queston as to whether it's humorous
it's an open question as to who wants to actually maintain it, fix bugs,
add quotes - and, essentially, become upstream (you'd need to get knightbrd
quotes included somewhere, for example).

Dropping fortunes-offensive completely (and the associated
 translations/extra files in Italian and
Spanish) is one straightforward way to solve a problem. There's no firm
consensus for that. That's OK.

Not packaging the single .dat file and telling people how to download it (and
other fortunes files / how to write their own) would be another way.
(And yes, we could be missing out on great fortune cookies from lots
of other places).

The utility of a separate package depends on how much work it is to 
produce it. That was the renaming bug that jmtd fixed, I think.
I think removing Hitler/Goebbels quotes from an obscure game is worthwhile:
it stops any association / any *Debian encourages Nazism* and means that we
don't have to worry about hosting it anywhere at all.

It is always worthwhile to remember that Debian is worldwide, is used by
people of all ages and sensibilities and has a set of values.
Whether we need to apply those to every game / piece of content?

The discussion didn't seem to find full consensus but it wasn't intended as
censorship

Andy Cater

> -- 
>      w@uter.{be,co.za}
> wouter@{grep.be,fosdem.org,debian.org}
> 
> I will have a Tin-Actinium-Potassium mixture, thanks.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13121

Andrew M.A. Cater dijo [Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 07:33:53AM +0000]:
> (...)
> The utility of a separate package depends on how much work it is to 
> produce it. That was the renaming bug that jmtd fixed, I think.
> I think removing Hitler/Goebbels quotes from an obscure game is worthwhile:
> it stops any association / any *Debian encourages Nazism* and means that we
> don't have to worry about hosting it anywhere at all.

Although during this discussion it was shown via several examples (and
not one counterexample TTBOMK) that, while fortunes-off does have
nazi-leaders snippets, it's not something that can be read as
endorsing those views, but just the opposite -- either ridiculing
them, pointing out how flawed the ideas were, or somesuch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13122

On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 at 18:40, Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Andrew M.A. Cater dijo [Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 07:33:53AM +0000]:
> > (...)
> > The utility of a separate package depends on how much work it is to
> > produce it. That was the renaming bug that jmtd fixed, I think.
> > I think removing Hitler/Goebbels quotes from an obscure game is worthwhile:
> > it stops any association / any *Debian encourages Nazism* and means that we
> > don't have to worry about hosting it anywhere at all.
>
> Although during this discussion it was shown via several examples (and
> not one counterexample TTBOMK) that, while fortunes-off does have
> nazi-leaders snippets, it's not something that can be read as
> endorsing those views, but just the opposite -- either ridiculing
> them, pointing out how flawed the ideas were, or somesuch.
>

Correct, it is not the data to be evil but how we perceive it.
Forgetting the past is not the right way to deal with it but the
easiest to repeat the errors.

Best, R-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13123

Le Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 07:33:53AM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater a écrit :
> 
> Dropping fortunes-offensive completely (and the associated
>  translations/extra files in Italian

It does not seem to be translations and at least contains original
creations.  Or maybe one can point me to the equivalent of fanculo in
the English package ?

I wondered about the absence of a French version.  If I would make one,
would it have to offend me or to offend others ?  Actually, I am not
sure to want the answer...

Or maybe the answer is the following: if I write a pet package
containing pieces of opinion texts that I think are important and upload
it to NEW because I believe it is cheap for Debian to distributes it, I
bet the answer will be something "please distribute it yourself until it
demonstrates relevance beyond your own circles".

Have a nice day,

Charles

-- 
Charles Plessy                         Nagahama, Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan
Tooting from work,           https://mastodon.technology/@charles_plessy
Tooting from home,                 https://framapiaf.org/@charles_plessy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13117

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 23:56, Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:18:48AM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> wrote on 20/11/2022 at 22:14:35+0100:
> >
> > > On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 21:42, G. Branden Robinson
> > > <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Thank you for, perhaps inadvertently, compelling me to review some of
> > >> the content of the package.  I can now say that I am certain there is
> > >> material of worth in the fortunes-off package and support its retention
> > >> in the Debian distribution.  A review process for individual entries
> > >> that are incompatible with the project's values is manifest in the BTS.
> > >>
> > >
> > > rational approach vs cancel culture: 1 vs 0
> > > <3
> >
> > Cancel culture would be shaming those having done the content/package,
> > trying to hide it so that no one could see it (it's on GitHub and no one
> > here plans on having it removed from there) and burn on a bench anyone
> > asking for it to be back.
> >
> > The mere thing I did is to state that it's garbage to me and it should
> > be thrown out from the archive because we have better stuff to do with
> > our free time.
> >
> > Your answer: "cancel culture".
> >
> > I guess it's supposed to be a "rational approach"? This is rich.
>
> I think the bit of "rational approach" is to see *why* the package was
> called "offensive" (because $DPL-of-a-long-time-ago decided that certain
> subjects are offensive and they shouldn't be in the "regular" package),
> and whether it actually results in a net positive (answer: probably not,
> depending on your point of view).
>
> If the "offensive" package were, in fact, mostly nazi and other such
> similar content then you would have a point; but I in fact used to have
> "fortune -o" in my .bashrc file, and, no, it really isn't. You might get
> personally insulted occasionally, but that's about it (and if you can't
> stand that, then, well, don't install the "offensive" package and/or
> don't use the "-o" parameter to fortune -- I mean, there are *two*
> barriers!).
>
> Perhaps if there is something in the "offensive" package that we can
> point to and declare really problematic, we can file bugs about that?
> But just removing the whole package because "oh no" feels like the
> baby/bathwater story and, yes, cancel culture.
>

Considering that "offensive" is a definition that greatly changes
along history time and geography space, there is no reason to abandon
a package that after all is an example of what - today and in our
culture - we consider offensive. As stated above there are two
barriers that prevent the common user from getting exposed to that
material: the installation of the package and the use of the -o
option. Take in consideration that many people consider offensive
statements pro-LGBT+ for example. So, those statements should also be
moved into the "offensive" package? (I don't even know if there are
such statements, just for example).

At its extreme consequences the cancel culture brings to the
consequences profetized by Dostoievski: "Tolerance will reach such a
level that intelligent people will be banned from thinking so as not
to offend the imbeciles′′ - opss - SORRY - I cited a Russian authors!
LOL

Think about it, even twice... :-)

Best, R-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13067

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 12:28:59PM -0600, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2022-11-20T11:41:56+0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > I'm personally fine to defend the "less neutral" position we take by
> > dropping fortunes-off which is total garbage.

> I'll stop here.  That's 5 out of 5, none of which advocates the
> oppression of any group based on ethnic or ideologic categories.

So are you volunteering to adopt the package and do the work of fixing it up
to remove the garbage that our users SHOULDN'T be subjected to through our
archive?

This isn't Sodom and Gomorrah; the package shouldn't be spared from death
because you found 5 good fortunes in it.  This package is a fossilized
collection of fortunes that some random people on Usenet found funny or
otherwise worthy of inclusion over 25 years ago.  There are subcollections
of fortunes in this package that are explicitly *categorized* as racist,
homophobic, and misogynistic.

The package IS garbage.  I've looked at those files, the categorizations are
not incorrect, and there is no redeeming value in shipping such things in
Debian.

If someone wants to sift through the contents of fortunes-off to separate
the wheat from the chaff, fine, let them do it.  But the presence of some
good fortunes in the package doesn't compel anyone to keep it, nor does
rightly pointing out the garbage that's in it incur an obligation to do the
work to filter out only the stuff that conflicts with the project's
Diversity Statement.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13075

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>>>>> "Steve" == Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

    Steve> This isn't Sodom and Gomorrah; the package shouldn't be
    Steve> spared from death because you found 5 good fortunes in it.
    Steve> This package is a fossilized collection of fortunes that some
    Steve> random people on Usenet found funny or otherwise worthy of
    Steve> inclusion over 25 years ago.  There are subcollections of
    Steve> fortunes in this package that are explicitly *categorized* as
    Steve> racist, homophobic, and misogynistic.

    Steve> The package IS garbage.  I've looked at those files, the
    Steve> categorizations are not incorrect, and there is no redeeming
    Steve> value in shipping such things in Debian.

    Steve> If someone wants to sift through the contents of fortunes-off
    Steve> to separate the wheat from the chaff, fine, let them do it.
    Steve> But the presence of some good fortunes in the package doesn't
    Steve> compel anyone to keep it, nor does rightly pointing out the
    Steve> garbage that's in it incur an obligation to do the work to
    Steve> filter out only the stuff that conflicts with the project's
    Steve> Diversity Statement.

Steve, I absolutely agree with you that unless someone is going to do
the work of maintaining the package that it should not be in Debian.
We disagree to some degree on what work is required.

I have said I won't get involved in fortunes-off unless asked to do so.
But to the extent that your message talks about the broader issues, and
what our project consensus might be, I will respond.

I disagree with you that we have a project consensus that the diversity
statement should apply to software in Debian.
I would not support such a consensus.
I disagree that racist, homophobic or misogynistic content in the
creative areas of Debian is inherently something we should not
distribute simply because it is racist, homophobic, or misogynistic.  I
think it depends on context.

I speak up only that my silence not be counted as supporting a consensus
that I do not think exists.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13077

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

At 2022-11-20T15:34:51-0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 12:28:59PM -0600, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > At 2022-11-20T11:41:56+0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > > I'm personally fine to defend the "less neutral" position we take by
> > > dropping fortunes-off which is total garbage.
> 
> > I'll stop here.  That's 5 out of 5, none of which advocates the
> > oppression of any group based on ethnic or ideologic categories.
> 
> So are you volunteering to adopt the package and do the work of fixing
> it up to remove the garbage that our users SHOULDN'T be subjected to
> through our archive?

I'm considering it, yes.  Or was.

> This isn't Sodom and Gomorrah; the package shouldn't be spared from
> death because you found 5 good fortunes in it.

I think the God of Abraham's magic number was originally 50, but crafty
old Moses bargained him down to ten.

But I appreciate the analogy.  You, Mr. Cater, and Mr. Dowland are
carrying out a divine genocide against the irredeemably corrupt and
sinful fortunes-off package, except that unlike Yahweh, you won't be
talked into sparing it no matter how much of worth may remain there.

Fair enough--ain't none of y'all ever appeared to me as a burning bush.

But you seem to forget that I said that the ones I quotes were the first
five that "fortune -o" returned to me.  For the statistical likelihood
of that, see below.

> This package is a fossilized collection of fortunes that some random
> people on Usenet found funny or otherwise worthy of inclusion over 25
> years ago.

True.

> There are subcollections of fortunes in this package that are
> explicitly *categorized* as racist, homophobic, and misogynistic.

This I didn't notice until I wrote a pipeline to count them up.  I have
no need for such sentiments (as I assess them) and no desire to
promulgate them without some sort of framing or context.  (The
"fortunes" package, even without its "-off" component, has never served
as a "daily affirmation" or a source of feel-good pabulum.)

Personally, I'd like it if the package were _more_ intellectually
challenging, particularly in the presentation of surprising mathematical
facts.  More items from the other Hofstadter (Douglas) and Martin
Gardner could increase its value tremendously.  A broadened mind is an
improved mind.  Glib aphorisms in the school of methodological
individualism from, say, Robert Heinlein, are an adolescent affectation,
and illuminate little.

> The package IS garbage.

By your metric, so is the Hebrew Bible.  For all the slaughter,
xenophobia, and ethno-religious supremacism in it, there's some good
stuff as well.  I find the exasperated jeremiads of some of the later
prophets relatable and applicable to modern life, though I acknowledge
that my interpretive frame would alarm many practitioners of faiths that
hold that work as sacred.

The package is a mixed bag.  If you can't distinguish the worth of the
statements of William Hofstadter from Adolph Hitler or those of Emma
Goldman from Anita Bryant then in my opinion you disqualify yourself
as a cultural critic.  I trust you can do better than this.

> I've looked at those files, the categorizations are not incorrect, and
> there is no redeeming value in shipping such things in Debian.

That just leaves the other 23 categories.

So let's have a quantitative look, reminding ourselves that '%' is a
separator, not a terminator (so we can't just grep and count, we need to
add one--not that this will substantially affect the result).

$ grep -Fcx % /usr/share/games/fortunes/off/{hphobia,misogyny,racism}.u8 | cut -d: -f2 | awk '{ sum=sum+$NF+1 } END { print sum }'
107
$ grep -Fcx % /usr/share/games/fortunes/off/*.u8 | cut -d: -f2 | awk '{ sum=sum+$NF+1 } END { print sum }'
7021

(I didn't include "misandry.u8" as offensive because (1) you didn't
mention it as contravening Debian's values and (2) presumably no serious
person would forward the proposition that it does.  Retaining that file
along with Raymond's firearm fetishism in the "inoffensive" fortunes
leaves one's cookie corpus with the curious ethics of the captive
society in the film _Zardoz_: "The gun is good!  The penis is evil!"[1])

Anyway, 1.52%.  No wonder I got nothing shocking in five draws with
replacement from that bag of stones.  Admittedly, I'm hard to shock even
with the contents of the files you derogated--I grew up in the Southern
U.S.[2] and thus have heard it all before, to the point of actual
nausea, frequently drawled from the mouths of "respected members of the
community".

> If someone wants to sift through the contents of fortunes-off to
> separate the wheat from the chaff, fine, let them do it.

This was already done by the process that created "fortunes-off" from
"fortunes" in the first place.  Did I not make myself clear that I found
that process deeply flawed?

> But the presence of some good fortunes in the package doesn't compel
> anyone to keep it, nor does rightly pointing out the garbage that's in
> it incur an obligation to do the work to filter out only the stuff
> that conflicts with the project's Diversity Statement.

You don't need to quote §2.1.1 of the Debian Constitution to me.

I acknowledge that adding any fortune cookies by J. K. Rowling, Margaret
Atwood, or Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie would be a fraught process even if
the chosen sentiments would survive scrutiny if unattributed.  (Rebecca
Tuvel is right out--right?)

Whatever the (further) outcome, every decision made regarding the
content of this package constitutes political action.  Sam doesn't want
the job and after a brief experience of seduction by Steve M., I don't
think I do either.  I suspect my own politics as being out of sync with
the Project as it stands today (if indeed they were ever otherwise), but
I am profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of producing something
constitutive of _prescriptive_ politics for the Debian Project (or for
anyone else).

If we assert that we've thrown out all that is offensive, a claim we
made when fortunes-off was first segregated from its counterpart, then
we have necessarily implied that whatever we have retained is not.[3]

I don't want to be that sort of gatekeeper, a role which I fear would
mean I'd spend much of my time arguing with "wokes" and "anti-wokes"
over content, but there's a fate even worse than that--it's to somehow
_succeed_ and end up with something that enjoys passive acceptance.  It
would then be at risk of ossifying for _another_ 20+ years.  The
implication that the cookies in the "non-offensive" fortunes package are
all unobjectionable is untenable, as I tried to point out with my
institutional memory post.[4]  I guess that effort failed.  Nevertheless
I caution anyone of the wisdom and the worth of such an endeavor.

I'll close with a fortune I _would_ include.

  "Too long have the workers of the world waited for some Moses to lead
  them out of bondage.  He has not come; he never will come.  I would
  not lead you out if I could; for if you could be led out, you could be
  led back in again." -- Eugene V. Debs[5]

Regards,
Branden

[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070948/quotes?ref_=tt_ql_sm
[2] Maybe that's where I got my tendency to write at Faulknerian length.
[3] People have labored mightily over these issues--surprise!
    https://www.ala.org/aboutala/governance/policymanual/updatedpolicymanual/section2/53intellfreedom
[4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2022/11/msg00030.html
[5] https://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works/1906/060310-debs-glimpseintothefuture.pdf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13082

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>>>>> "G" == G Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> writes:

    G> By your metric, so is the Hebrew Bible.  For all the slaughter,
    G> xenophobia, and ethno-religious supremacism in it, there's some
    G> good stuff as well.  I find the exasperated jeremiads of some of
    G> the later prophets relatable and applicable to modern life,
    G> though I acknowledge that my interpretive frame would alarm many
    G> practitioners of faiths that hold that work as sacred.

I appreciated your first messages in this thread.
I think perhaps you have continued in the same style without fully
considering the implications of doing so.
Pointing out that something  has value once is constructive.
Trying to create a reduction like you did above particularly on a topic
like religion or like the worth of someone else's sacred text is going
to (as another person pointed out) start a culture war.
Your point will be lost in the strength of others reactions.
I think it has crossed into the realm of not so constructive.

I do think there are constructive things you could do:

* Maintain the package with filtering if you believe that's best.

* Maintain the package without filtering if you believe that's best;
  take the position of being a maintainer and force those who disagree
  with you to fight the uphill battle of overriding a maintainer.

* State your support to be counted in any determination of consensus and
  leave it at that.

B ut please don't fan the flames.

Thanks,

--Sam

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13087

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

At 2022-11-21T07:58:29-0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "G" == G Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>   G> By your metric, so is the Hebrew Bible.  For all the slaughter,
>   G> xenophobia, and ethno-religious supremacism in it, there's some
>   G> good stuff as well.  I find the exasperated jeremiads of some of
>   G> the later prophets relatable and applicable to modern life,
>   G> though I acknowledge that my interpretive frame would alarm many
>   G> practitioners of faiths that hold that work as sacred.
> 
> I appreciated your first messages in this thread.

Thanks, Sam.  (And Tomas, to whom I have an unfinished reply lingering
in my postponed folder.)  It's a personal victory condition when anyone
derives value from my epistles.  Especially meaningful to me is when
someone is entertained or follows a link that they enjoy more than my
own superficial scratchings.  That's partly why I include them.

> I think perhaps you have continued in the same style without fully
> considering the implications of doing so.

Fair.  Old dog performs old tricks.

> Trying to create a reduction like you did above particularly on a
> topic like religion or like the worth of someone else's sacred text is
> going to (as another person pointed out) start a culture war.

Maybe; I would point out that as far as I know no one has (recently)
proposed dropping the "bible-kjv" package and I would oppose such
removal if they did, despite my own ill-treatment at the hands of its
exponents.  Too bad the copyright holders in the NRSV[1] don't place
their modern translation under a Free license; I think doing so would,
in the long run, undercut the King-James-only movement, which is
dominated by reactionaries dedicated to the production and
retransmission of material of the sort fortunes-off is being removed to
discard.  But I digress.  The point is that these scriptures retain
presumptive value in our distribution, whereas everything that _is_ of
worth in fortunes-off (R. Hofstadter, H. S. Thompson, A. Bierce, E. St.
Vincent Millay, A. Einstein [yes], W. LeoGrande, S. J. Gould, G.
Carlin, ...) was already deprecated by dint of the term "offensive", and
I will point out yet again how dubious the curation process was in the
first place, but now it's just plain gone.  You may perhaps understand
how one could perceive this as maintaining Judeo-Christianity's regnant
status in the Debian distribution.

I propose a research project for a courageous volunteer.  Count up how
many women, non-whites, and Jewish people quoted in fortunes-off whom
Mr. Dowland muffled in the name of anti-racism, anti-sexism, and
anti-Nazism.[2]  Of those, how many expressed _any_ of the attitudes he
objected to?

> Your point will be lost in the strength of others reactions.

I have always found this sort of thing difficult to manage.  I might buy
electrons by the barrel but when discourse degrades to sloganeering I
feel I lack the tools to cope, and tend to lose interest.  (As impolitic
as it is to say, that includes some expressions of support.  I have been
informed by close friends that I am difficult to please in some ways.)

> I do think there are constructive things you could do:
> 
> * Maintain the package with filtering if you believe that's best.
> 
> * Maintain the package without filtering if you believe that's best;
>   take the position of being a maintainer and force those who disagree
>   with you to fight the uphill battle of overriding a maintainer.
>
> * State your support to be counted in any determination of consensus
>   and leave it at that.

I only have so many fights in me.  Cajoling man page authors to use a
new "MR" macro to put hyperlinked cross-references in their documents, I
expect to take the preponderance of my feeble persuasive energies for
some time.[3]

If I had unlimited resources, I'd adopt "fortunes" and discard some
items.  I might keep some of the stuff like the ugly quote from Anita
Bryant--but with contextualization--because she is nearly forgotten (at
least by hetero folks in the U.S.) and yet she was a newsworthy figure
who illustrated how high you could rise with smug homophobia in the late
1970s and at the same time how swiftly and effectively a community
opposed to bigotry could organize against her even in the Carter
presidency.  Less than 10 years after Stonewall, Anita got cancelled
before it was cool^W^Weven had a name.

It was not a downhill glide from there, though...in 1981 the Reagan
Administration swept in, packed from top to bottom with homophobes who
welcomed the advent of AIDS with undisguised glee, greeting it as a
scourge that would cleanse the land of gay folks who invited God's
revenge for the incorrectness of their desires and private conduct.[4]

There's an organization called Working Class History[5] that shares a
daily historical calendar on some social media sites.  You don't have to
be a Marxist to infer that the history of the working class is a bloody
one, with much savage victimization of ordinary laboring people, so
these sites frequently censor, de-promote, downrank, etc., WCH's posts
because they might discomfit people or bum them out such that they are
less receptive to advertising.  They also feature noteworthy
anti-fascist figures like Mildred Fish, Hannie Schaft, or Nina
Lobkovskaya; the latter two assassinated people "just" for being Nazis
or Nazi collaborators in a military occupation.  WCH profiles are often
capsule biographies summarizing the varying fates of these people.

That's the style with which I'd like to supplement quotations that some
would categorize as hate speech and in response to which they
reflexively reach for the censorship button.  Any quotation that
resisted such contextualization, I expect I'd throw away.

Apart from cool math (within the tight constraints of terminal emulator
typography--but the HAKMEM memo[6] was fit for that decades ago), that's
the kind of thing I'd like to see more of in our fortune cookies.  But
already I can foresee a Jonathan Waltheresque[7] figure nodding to
himself sagely at Jonathan Dowland's action and deducing a precedent for
excision of "hateful" figures like Schaft and Lobkovskaya.  And at some
point the tankies will show up to speak from behind facebrush mustaches
with honeyed venom of how my anti-fascist editorial slant is so mild as
to be counter-revolutionary.[8]

I don't know that I have enough spoons for those sorts of BS.

But, since you asked, that's my sketch for a future fortunes-nsfw or
whatever.  (Let's please be honest enough to admit that the original
purpose of the package's segregation was attempted avoidance of
interactions with U.S. corporate HR departments.)

> But please don't fan the flames.

Fear not; I feel my resolve flagging apace.  I should see a doctor about
my inability to sustain a flame war.  There may be a drug for me.

Regards,
Branden

[1] http://nrsvbibles.org/index.php/licensing/
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2022/11/msg00062.html
[3] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/NEWS?id=eac39afe3e7a86f3adbfb02ff5e33bfd69d4c224#n224
[4] https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Reagan-s-AIDS-Legacy-Silence-equals-death-2751030.php
[5] https://workingclasshistory.com/
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAKMEM
[7] I drop this name with reservations because I think the guy is safely
    long gone; were I as plugged in to Debian's current events as I used
    to be, I might be able to think of a contemporary example.
[8] I stole a bit from Andrei Codrescu, who writes better than I do.
    https://www.npr.org/2003/01/15/921847/commentary-mustaches

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13088

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

G. Branden Robinson left as an exercise for the reader:
> I only have so many fights in me.  Cajoling man page authors to use a
> new "MR" macro to put hyperlinked cross-references in their documents, I
> expect to take the preponderance of my feeble persuasive energies for
> some time.[3]

hot damn, there's a MR troff macro for hyperlinked cross-references?
sweet!

> [3] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/NEWS?id=eac39afe3e7a86f3adbfb02ff5e33bfd69d4c224#n224

indeed there is!

-- 
nick black -=- https://www.nick-black.com
to make an apple pie from scratch,
you need first invent a universe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web