This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: fortune maintainer wanted and question for Corinna (was Re: Obscene content in cygwin file.)
On Fri, 07 Jan 2005, Peter A. Castro might have said:
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jan 7 01:28, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
> > > Right now I'm looking at the debian packages instead:
> > > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/fortune-mod
> > > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/fortunes-bofh-excuses
> > >
> > > which generate 5 packages: fortune-mod (the binaries),
> > > fortunes-min, fortunes, fortunes-off, and fortunes-bofh-excuses.
> > >
> > > If these look ok to me, do you see any problem with using them instead?
> > > (There are also a lot of non-English data files packages that I'm not
> > > going to mess with at the moment.)
> > Personally I'd rather see only one fortune package. Using the -o
> > plus rot13 technique should really do it.
> I'm with Corinna here. Fortune does not warrant 5 packages, or even 3.
> One package is sufficient. ROT13 and mark the limericks with -o and move
> on. Deviating from an already established convention for packaging a
> given program is just asking for trouble, and you're artificially making
> more work than is necessary. K.I.S.S. !!
Since you must *ask* for the 'rude' version of fortune (fortune -o)
before you get any of the alleged offensive material, then what's the
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html