RFC: An app category for "adult" material?
Martin Bagge / brother
brother at bsnet.se
Mon Nov 21 02:44:29 PST 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2011-11-21 11:17, Peter Brett wrote:
> Adding the "Adult" category to the spec is clearly the Wrong Thing,
> both technically and semantically, and seems to me to be an attempt
> to misuse the .desktop file Categories field in an inappropriate
This adult category thing is censorship in the worst form possible.
A bad name.
Something that upstream developers will add when they think it is
Or the distribution will have to patch the desktop files to add this
where they think it is appropriate.
This will not work.
Either the upstream developers have a different grasp of where the line
for a "adult"-mark goes or the distribution have their low barrier.
In the end the users are left to either patch their system because they
have a different standard for what would be considered adult material
than what both the distribution and the upstream developers have.
> Is it possible to back this change out?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the xdg