package submission policy question

[Elliot Lee]

On Tue, 31 May 2005, Michael A. Peters wrote:

> The concern was two-fold:
> 
> 1) the nature of the software could be seen as religious
> efforts/campaigns
> 
> 2) the title of the software, sword, could invoke negative reactions
> from some people

$0.02 from me (with FESCO being the final word on things).

I'm sure those perspectives are possible, but you gave a good explanation
of why they aren't reasonable. Now that the issue has come up, someone
will be offended no matter whether you include the packages or don't
include them. Installing and using the packages is entirely optional, so
it's not like people are being forced to read the books.

Public opinion is a fickle thing that may wind up turning solidly against
these packages, but for now I think it's best if Fedora package policies
are limited to the technical and legal realms, while keeping general good
taste of the majority in mind.

Best,
-- Elliot