Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On 2019-06-27 07:32:04, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > > On 26/06/19 23.09, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: > > ГI'd say that we should never be touching anything like this. > > вт, 25 июн. 2019 г., 7:57 Bagas Sanjaya : > > In order to inform to users, especially parents, about potentially > objectionable content in Debian packages, Content > Rating System (CRS) can be deployed to Debian. With CRS, users can > choose to install packages that is rated for their > age. In some cases, CRS also filter or block certain contents in > certain jurisdictions when legally required. > > Exactly for this reason. By filtering you will limit the freedom of users. > And if the legal guardian of the user disagrees with the rating, either he > or the user will have to lye about their age. Please, do not ever > consider > to add such rating system to Debian. > > Someone's freedom is always limited by others one. So freedom is not absolute, > but relative > > In case at home, children's freedom are limited by parents because parents > need > to protect their children from mental damage long-term. Yes, and it's up to parents to make those decisions not up to Debian. -- |_|0|_| | |_|_|0| "Panta rei" | |0|0|0| kuLa | gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x686930DD58C338B3 3DF1 A4DF C732 4688 38BC F121 6869 30DD 58C3 38B3 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On 26/06/19 23.09, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
ГI'd say that we should never be touching anything like this.
вт, 25 июн. 2019 г., 7:57 Bagas Sanjaya <mailto:bagasdo...@gmail.com>>:
In order to inform to users, especially parents, about potentially
objectionable content in Debian packages, Content
Rating System (CRS) can be deployed to Debian. With CRS, users can choose
to install packages that is rated for their
age. In some cases, CRS also filter or block certain contents in certain
jurisdictions when legally required.
Exactly for this reason. By filtering you will limit the freedom of
users. And if the legal guardian of the user disagrees with the
rating, either he or the user will have to lye about their age.
Please, do not ever consider to add such rating system to Debian.
Someone's freedom is always limited by others one. So freedom is not
absolute, but relative
In case at home, children's freedom are limited by parents because
parents need to protect their children from mental damage long-term.
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
чт, 27 июн. 2019 г. в 03:32, Bagas Sanjaya : > > > On 26/06/19 23.09, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: > > ГI'd say that we should never be touching anything like this. > > вт, 25 июн. 2019 г., 7:57 Bagas Sanjaya : >> >> In order to inform to users, especially parents, about potentially >> objectionable content in Debian packages, Content >> Rating System (CRS) can be deployed to Debian. With CRS, users can choose to >> install packages that is rated for their >> age. In some cases, CRS also filter or block certain contents in certain >> jurisdictions when legally required. > > Exactly for this reason. By filtering you will limit the freedom of users. > And if the legal guardian of the user disagrees with the rating, either he or > the user will have to lye about their age. Please, do not ever consider to > add such rating system to Debian. > > Someone's freedom is always limited by others one. So freedom is not > absolute, but relative > > In case at home, children's freedom are limited by parents because parents > need to protect their children from mental damage long-term. As I parent I do try to protect my children's mental health. However I do not need any extra layer that will make filtering decisions based on abstract assumptions. Depending on my level of child-confidence, I might or might not allow my kid to use different kinds of software. But it should be my decision, not some CRS system. Because CRS system does not know a thing about my kids. The typical motto of Open Souce Software always was 'to provide possibility rather than policy'. We should not step away from that rule. -- With best wishes Dmitry
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
ГI'd say that we should never be touching anything like this. вт, 25 июн. 2019 г., 7:57 Bagas Sanjaya : > In order to inform to users, especially parents, about potentially > objectionable content in Debian packages, Content > Rating System (CRS) can be deployed to Debian. With CRS, users can choose to > install packages that is rated for their > age. In some cases, CRS also filter or block certain contents in certain > jurisdictions when legally required. > > Exactly for this reason. By filtering you will limit the freedom of users. And if the legal guardian of the user disagrees with the rating, either he or the user will have to lye about their age. Please, do not ever consider to add such rating system to Debian.
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 10:40 Uhr schrieb Bagas Sanjaya : > > On 25/06/19 20.19, Matthias Klumpp wrote: > > [...] > > So APT need to do what you mention, that is determining age rating not > only based on AppStream metadata, but also on system locale? Yes. Since the things that determine age ratings depend on regional (!) legislation, varying wildly between different countries or even within countries, that is the only way. I am currently working on a plan to centralize the age mapping in libappstream, but tbh I do not thing that we will ever have a fully legally sound solution for this without employing a lot of lawyers. There is just so much stuff to take care of, and so much regional variation, that a software solution will likely not be able to cover all cases. See https://hughsie.github.io/oars/ (which is used in AppStream) for details. As the intro text says, we rely on people being honest about things and are purely informational. Cheers, Matthias -- I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On 25/06/19 20.19, Matthias Klumpp wrote: Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 11:51 Uhr schrieb Bagas Sanjaya : Simon McVittie: Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak), has this as an optional field for self-rating: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-content_rating https://hughsie.github.io/oars/ I suspect that's the only way this could possibly work without money changing hands. There are no age classifications, however. So based on content_rating tag on AppStream metadata, we can add logic to apt in order to determine age rating for our packages. However, external review (maintainers) may be need in order to prevent misleading information on content_rating. To clarify: Age ratings vary wildly between countries. So what we expect is that software centers will not actually display content_rating information, but instead compile an age rating out of it based on the user's current location/locale and then display that. Having a "one-size fits all" generic rating isn't very practical. Cheers, Matthias So APT need to do what you mention, that is determining age rating not only based on AppStream metadata, but also on system locale?
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Dear Bagas, On 26.06.19 04:50, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > Emmanuel Arias: >> IMO this idea represent a big work. And if you want to involved upstream, >> maybe will be a problem. Some upstream, could not be interest on participate >> because could be a "extra" work. But if we implement a content rating >> system, the freedom could be affected because the opinion on a package may >> be affected by this new system. > > Regarding freedom, yes it can be affected by CRS because CRS can limit > freedom to use programs for some users > (particularly non-adults). But CRS limit such freedom in order to protect > psychology users for long term from negative > impacts of programs they used. I don't think this problem is solvable by technical means at all. You need caring parents (need not be 'real parents' necessarily) to really protect children. Bye Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Bagas Sanjaya writes: > Regarding freedom, yes it can be affected by CRS because CRS can limit > freedom to use programs for some users > (particularly non-adults). But CRS limit such freedom in order to protect > psychology users for long term from negative > impacts of programs they used. Surely this would be a direct conflict with the DFSG? Best, Gard
Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Emmanuel Arias: IMO this idea represent a big work. And if you want to involved upstream, maybe will be a problem. Some upstream, could not be interest on participate because could be a "extra" work. But if we implement a content rating system, the freedom could be affected because the opinion on a package may be affected by this new system. Regarding freedom, yes it can be affected by CRS because CRS can limit freedom to use programs for some users (particularly non-adults). But CRS limit such freedom in order to protect psychology users for long term from negative impacts of programs they used.
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On 6/25/19 8:27 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:40:04AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: >> Based on above, what are your opinions/thoughts/positions about Content >> Rating System in Debian? > just NO. please create a fork and leave Debian without this. Hard but necessary response :-) > IMO this idea represent a big work. And if you want to involved upstream, maybe will be a problem. Some upstream, could not be interest on participate because could be a "extra" work. But if we implement a content rating system, the freedom could be affected because the opinion on a package may be affected by this new system. -- Emmanuel Arias @eamanu https://eamanu.com signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 11:51 Uhr schrieb Bagas Sanjaya : > > Simon McVittie: > > Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is > distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak), > has this as an optional field for self-rating: > > https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-content_rating > https://hughsie.github.io/oars/ > > I suspect that's the only way this could possibly work without money > changing hands. > > There are no age classifications, however. > > So based on content_rating tag on AppStream metadata, we can add logic to apt > in order to determine age rating for our > packages. However, external review (maintainers) may be need in order to > prevent misleading information on > content_rating. To clarify: Age ratings vary wildly between countries. So what we expect is that software centers will not actually display content_rating information, but instead compile an age rating out of it based on the user's current location/locale and then display that. Having a "one-size fits all" generic rating isn't very practical. Cheers, Matthias -- I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Hi, On Tue, 2019-06-25 at 11:40 +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > Based on above, what are your opinions/thoughts/positions about > Content Rating System in Debian? is this related to your other proposal involving giving "sudo" permissions to teenagers to handle this age recommendation stuff for TV programs? | In fact, many television stations have most programs written for | teens (age 13 and older), so sysadmins there configure sudoers which | allows teens to behave like sysadmins themselves (by giving them full | administrator privileges) on their production systems. Also, parental | monitoring and guidance can reduce likehood of teens breaking such | systems. Maybe because teens are largest marketshare for TVs. Ansgar - rating "kill -KILL" X-rated for extreme violence
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:40:04AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > Based on above, what are your opinions/thoughts/positions about Content > Rating System in Debian? just NO. please create a fork and leave Debian without this. -- tschau, Holger --- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 12:43:56PM +0200, Paride Legovini wrote: > My question is: are we trying to solve an actual problem here? No, and please note that the author is not even a Debian user: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2019/06/msg00376.html -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Bagas Sanjaya wrote on 25/06/2019: > Hello Debian Developers, > > Debian provides more than 51000 packages. From those packages, some are > appropriate for every ages, and some others are > only for specific age groups for some reasons. > > In order to inform to users, especially parents, about potentially > objectionable content in Debian packages, Content > Rating System (CRS) can be deployed to Debian. With CRS, users can choose to > install packages that is rated for their > age. In some cases, CRS also filter or block certain contents in certain > jurisdictions when legally required. > > As in Google Play, Debian CRS is based on official ratings from International > Age Rating Coalition (IARC). The rating system in Google Play makes some sense (at least on paper) because you can leave a phone to a kid, configured with their Google account, and Google will allow to install only apps deemed appropriate for the account holder's age. There is no such a thing in Debian. There isn't a Debian account which is able to give you partial access to the repositories. If you are root you can install everything; if you aren't you can't install anything. And when installing a package for a kid then checking its description is probably better than any rating system. We can't achieve the same result as Google, which in my opinion wouldn't be useful anyway; see below. > Pros: > - Users, especially parents, can install packages suitable for their age. In > case of parents, this apply to their > sons/daughters. I don't think there is a meaningful "Pro" here. The first and in most cases only packages that would make sense to control are web browsers. Nowadays not installing a web browser makes a computer almost useless for almost any purpose a kid or teenager may want it for. At this point it's just better to install a browser and leave the machine offline. At least they'll have access to offline documentation! Or to a local Wikipedia mirror. > - For users in some jurisdiction, they can only install packages that is > legal in their jurisdiction. For example, Debian > users in USA can only install US version of GnuPG, but in outside USA, users > can install international version of GnuPG > instead. Didn't this stop to be a thing in the late nineties? The issue wouldn't be age-related anyway. > Based on above, what are your opinions/thoughts/positions about Content > Rating System in Debian? My question is: are we trying to solve an actual problem here? Are there packages that you would consider not suitable for young users, and whose impact wouldn't be greatly inferior to the one of web browsers (which, in my reasoning, are going to be installed anyway)? I hope the answer is not fortunes-off here :-) While this email is mostly a "thumbs down", I agree with Russ Allbery: if a group feels strongly enough about CRS to do the work, I think it will fit well in the debtags labeling system. Paride
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 16:33:53 +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > There are no age classifications, however. So based on content_rating tag on > AppStream metadata, we can add logic to apt in order to determine age rating > for our packages. I think this would be unwise. We can never get this right, because the descriptors that are considered suitable for a particular age vary widely between cultures and countries. The most likely outcome would be angry bug reports from parents who felt that the given age rating was inappropriate. Something like OARS is already somewhat subjective (how much violence can a game have and still be considered "moderate"?) but it's a lot closer to being objective than an age rating. smcv
Re: Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Simon McVittie: Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak), has this as an optional field for self-rating: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-content_rating https://hughsie.github.io/oars/ I suspect that's the only way this could possibly work without money changing hands. There are no age classifications, however. So based on content_rating tag on AppStream metadata, we can add logic to apt in order to determine age rating for our packages. However, external review (maintainers) may be need in order to prevent misleading information on content_rating.
Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Am Di., 25. Juni 2019 um 10:15 Uhr schrieb Simon McVittie : > > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:31:44 +0200, Philip Hands wrote: > > Also, it seems clear to me that the same game in all Linux disros is > > very likely to get the same rating, so this would be better done as a > > distribution agnostic level > > Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is > distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak), > has this as an optional field for self-rating: > > https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-content_rating > https://hughsie.github.io/oars/ > > I suspect that's the only way this could possibly work without money > changing hands. Indeed :-) Also, metainfo files can be written for every software component, not only for apps (although I thing GUI applications are the things age-rating is most relevant for). If any features in this are missing, let me or Richard Hughes know. Cheers, Matthias -- I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On 25/06/19 14.31, Philip Hands wrote: Bagas Sanjaya writes: Russ Allbery: It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on), and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason to believe that this is a common request by users of Debian? If so, could you share with us why you believe that? I'm discussing about CRS inspired from Google Play. Do Google Play not pay IARC for this? I would assume that there is a fee that covers IARC's costs in running the service, which is then paid out of the profit that Google makes on the games. What is it going to cost us to get 'bison' rated PG? Why is this useful? Also, it seems clear to me that the same game in all Linux disros is very likely to get the same rating, so this would be better done as a distribution agnostic level, preferably by someone that makes a profit from games or content anyway. For instance, I'd imagine that Steam have some sort of rating mechanism, which might even use IARC already, so one might be able to achieve this aim by talking to them about getting access to their system somehow, and perhaps getting them to include things in their database that they don't actually distribute themselves. One might imagine that one could buy a subscription to their rating database, say. Alternatively, parents who are interested might simply decide to subscribe to Steam if Steam provided a package that allowed subscribers to see the ratings for packages they were about to install. (I'm only saying Steam here because they've been quite Debian friendly AFAIK, but there's nothing stopping anyone else offering such ratings as a service to Debian users). Asking Debian to do it seems like it's just asking for trouble -- what happens when a child is traumatised by content that most people find completely innocuous in a package we've not yet got round to rating? Cheers, Phil. I don't know whether Google Play and Steam pay IARC or not, but if they do, the fee would be so expensive that Debian can't afford (unless we're RedHat or similar). Also, to implement CRS, major overhaul to packaging system (apt/dpkg) and user accounts need to be done in order to accommodate CRS. But CRS can give users insight about maturity of packages. So if sysadmins (parents in home networks) is about to install Apache HTTPD or other packages, they need to answer whether the packages are appropriate for their users' age or not. In multi-user setups (such as in servers) CRS can be a problem, because although majority of users are adults (18+), there are possibilities that children (7+) or teens (12+) also use such packages. Some packages might recommend Parental Guidance (PG) but it is not possible in server setups. I'm agree that CRS should be done on distribution-independent manner. This means that upstream file rating request to IARC in order to get their programs rated. Distributions (Debian/Ubuntu, RedHat, etc.) then package programs which have been rated. In Google Play, rating process is slightly different: upstream upload their applications/games to Google Play, then they fill rating questionnaire provide by Google Play and send it to IARC. Regardless, for CRS, we need a CRS system that is cross-distribution that can be implemented to package managers and user administration tools on most distributions. Erm, not 'PG' -- I meant whatever the "Anyone can watch this" label is. In IARC classification, that is 3+ (for anyone as long as they are not toddlers).
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Philipp Kern writes: > On 2019-06-25 09:31, Philip Hands wrote: >>> Russ Allbery: It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on), and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason to believe that this is a common request by users of Debian? If so, could you share with us why you believe that? >>> I'm discussing about CRS inspired from Google Play. >> Do Google Play not pay IARC for this? > > App developers are generally forced to self-rate their apps, otherwise > they disappear from the store. Right, but is that not done by filling out a questionnaire that is somehow administered/rated by IARC, which presumably means that they need to be paid for providing that somewhere along the line (or is it all government funded?). Also, IARC claim to keep ratings under review, which presumably also needs to be paid for somehow. I was guessing that they collect subscriptions from the platforms to cover the costs. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 09:31:44 +0200, Philip Hands wrote: > Also, it seems clear to me that the same game in all Linux disros is > very likely to get the same rating, so this would be better done as a > distribution agnostic level Appstream metadata, which is canonically provided by upstreams and is distro- and package-type-agnostic (available in at least apt and Flatpak), has this as an optional field for self-rating: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-content_rating https://hughsie.github.io/oars/ I suspect that's the only way this could possibly work without money changing hands. smcv
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
On 2019-06-25 09:31, Philip Hands wrote: Russ Allbery: It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on), and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason to believe that this is a common request by users of Debian? If so, could you share with us why you believe that? I'm discussing about CRS inspired from Google Play. Do Google Play not pay IARC for this? App developers are generally forced to self-rate their apps, otherwise they disappear from the store. Kind regards Philipp Kern
Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Philip Hands writes: > What is it going to cost us to get 'bison' rated PG? Why is this > useful? Erm, not 'PG' -- I meant whatever the "Anyone can watch this" label is. Although, I guess one could perhaps argue PG for bison: One could use it to build something that generates offensive content, and perhaps the joys of compiler writing should be saved for an appropriate age ;-) Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Bagas Sanjaya writes: > Russ Allbery: >> It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not >> to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of >> them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on), >> and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason to believe that >> this is a common request by users of Debian? If so, could you share with >> us why you believe that? > I'm discussing about CRS inspired from Google Play. Do Google Play not pay IARC for this? I would assume that there is a fee that covers IARC's costs in running the service, which is then paid out of the profit that Google makes on the games. What is it going to cost us to get 'bison' rated PG? Why is this useful? Also, it seems clear to me that the same game in all Linux disros is very likely to get the same rating, so this would be better done as a distribution agnostic level, preferably by someone that makes a profit from games or content anyway. For instance, I'd imagine that Steam have some sort of rating mechanism, which might even use IARC already, so one might be able to achieve this aim by talking to them about getting access to their system somehow, and perhaps getting them to include things in their database that they don't actually distribute themselves. One might imagine that one could buy a subscription to their rating database, say. Alternatively, parents who are interested might simply decide to subscribe to Steam if Steam provided a package that allowed subscribers to see the ratings for packages they were about to install. (I'm only saying Steam here because they've been quite Debian friendly AFAIK, but there's nothing stopping anyone else offering such ratings as a service to Debian users). Asking Debian to do it seems like it's just asking for trouble -- what happens when a child is traumatised by content that most people find completely innocuous in a package we've not yet got round to rating? Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Russ Allbery: It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on), and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason to believe that this is a common request by users of Debian? If so, could you share with us why you believe that? I'm discussing about CRS inspired from Google Play. A case study of implementing CRS is when parents which have Debian system installed on their computer wants to make sure that any programs installed there are appropriate for all family users there. Also we have "Self-Censoring" campaign which encouraging users to filter contents suitable for their age. "Self-Censoring" originates from TV programs, but it can also be applied to computer programs and applications (especially games) as well. Regardless, CRS is good not only to Debian, but also to end-user in longterm, although it is hard to implement and have some maintenance burden.
Re: Content Rating System in Debian
Bagas Sanjaya writes: > Based on above, what are your opinions/thoughts/positions about Content > Rating System in Debian? It sounds like a whole ton of work to get a useful amount of coverage (not to mention bothering upstreams with questionnaires that I suspect many of them would find irritating -- I certainly would with my upstream hat on), and I'm not clear on the benefit. Do you have some reason to believe that this is a common request by users of Debian? If so, could you share with us why you believe that? Debian already has a couple of voluntary labeling mechanisms that, while not precisely relevant to this, are at least adjacent: debtags for general package tagging (see the junior tag root, for instance, and name-based labeling of packages with potentially offensive content per https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#packages-with-potentially-offensive-content Both of those are nowhere near as comprehensive as CRS, of course, but it's not clear to me that something as comprehensive as CRS has enough demand to be worth the effort, and there's obviously a maintenance burden incurred by using it. It's probably worth noting, though, that if any group felt strongly enough about CRS to do the work, I don't see any obvious reason why debtags couldn't handle a set of CRS tags, which has the huge advantage of not requiring any work by the package maintainer and instead shifting the burden to the people who care about CRS. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Content Rating System in Debian
Hello Debian Developers, Debian provides more than 51000 packages. From those packages, some are appropriate for every ages, and some others are only for specific age groups for some reasons. In order to inform to users, especially parents, about potentially objectionable content in Debian packages, Content Rating System (CRS) can be deployed to Debian. With CRS, users can choose to install packages that is rated for their age. In some cases, CRS also filter or block certain contents in certain jurisdictions when legally required. As in Google Play, Debian CRS is based on official ratings from International Age Rating Coalition (IARC). Pros: - Users, especially parents, can install packages suitable for their age. In case of parents, this apply to their sons/daughters. - For users in some jurisdiction, they can only install packages that is legal in their jurisdiction. For example, Debian users in USA can only install US version of GnuPG, but in outside USA, users can install international version of GnuPG instead. Cons: - Since there are more than 51000 packages currently in Debian, rating review for those existing packages and new packages can take long time, depending on complexity of packages that are reviewed. - Current Debian system need to be overhauled (for example, when creating users with adduser, sysadmins need to input date of birth of their users) in order to make CRS work in Debian. - Not all programs/packages is suitable for rating review, especially command-line programs. If CRS will be implemented in Debian, I proposed following packaging workflow, based on Google Play: - Maintainers that is about to package a program, will notify to the upstream whether he/she would take a rating questionnaire or not. If he/she didn't take the questionnaire, the resulting package will be categorized as Unrated. - The upstream fill rating questionnaire and send it to IARC. - IARC calculates rating for upstream's program and send rating certificate back to upstream. If upstream don't agree with rating assigned to the program, he/she can file appeal using link in the certificate email. - Upstream contact maintainer about rating of the program that he/she get. - Maintainer then do packaging as usual and add rating for the package, possibly to control file. Based on above, what are your opinions/thoughts/positions about Content Rating System in Debian? Regards, Bagas
