block on name
awilliam at redhat.com
Sat Apr 28 00:13:50 UTC 2012
On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 14:55 -0400, george2 wrote:
> if one headmaster says the release is inappropriate to use in the
> teaching or desktop situation;
> if one religious leader objects to its use in that the supporting
> material for the name says "this is your new god"
> if one advocate of equality for women speaks up
> if one government department says its use violates discrimination
> in the workplace laws
> if one parent objects
> and it is picked up by the press....
It's a hot dog. It has always been a hot dog. The name is not an
innuendo, it is not a double entendre. If anyone thinks it is, that's
their problem, not ours. The whole beefy miracle thing is and _has
always been_ about a food product.
That aside: this list is for QA work. There's no possible basis for QA
as a group to object to this or indeed _any_ given release name. If
individual QA members believe there's something so terrible about the
release name that it's worth trying to provoke a screaming emergency,
then by all means, go ahead and do so - but I can't see any basis for
doing so as an action _of the QA group_. We're doing QA, we're not
debating implications of the release name.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
More information about the test