John Buttery wrote: > * On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:33:46AM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > >>Andrea Bolognani wrote: >> >>>I guess you mean libacme-brainfck-perl. >> >>Yes. >> >> >>>I think there is no need to use such a trick, since the program's name does >>>contain no offending words. >> >>Well, l-b-p's description doesn't either, yours does to date. > > > I fretted for a long time over whether to send this, but no, it has to > be said. As far as I'm concerned, the most offensive thing that's been > said so far is your line about how "decent" people don't use "bad > words".
I'm not really sure I follow you here. My intention was to suggest that most people taking offence could likely live with description similar to the one of libacme-brainfck-perl, or at least wouldn't really be harmed by two package descriptions of that type over one. I'm not really interested in the question whether the naming is incredibly witty humour or merely a sign of imaturity or whatever. Kind regards T. -- Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
