Hello Everyone!
I am Aniket Pradhan, username: major, who wrote "lsd" and initiated the discussion.
I would like to thank everyone for their input on this matter.
I agree with the others, that this IS a silly little script. I wrote it when I was learning shell programming. I published it to the AUR because it was going to be my first package here, and I wanted to keep it simple.
The reason I started the discussion was that I was not given enough time to decide whether to delete the package or to rename it (or if it was my decision or some other TUs). The reason also stated "not useful enough" which was very ambiguous to me. But, I guess that is resolved now since "There is no such procedure to follow when deleting packages", quoted from Eli. I never wanted this to become such big an issue. I just wanted to discuss on the ethicality of the deletion. To be honest, I never wanted to contest for that name "lsd", because I know that my script is very "trivial".
I would like to thank everyone, again, for participating in this discussion and giving your feedback. <3. (Thank you, Alad for reminding me to add an epilepsy warning).
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 15:54:32 +0530, Aniket Pradhan wrote:
(Thank you, Alad for reminding me to add an epilepsy warning).
Please don't overdo do it. As already pointed out by Xyne, epilepsy unlikely was at any point a consideration.
Without going into great detail:
"Contrasts in colour alone (without changes in luminance) are rarely triggers for PSE." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosensitive_epilepsy
Have you ever seen a warning label "may contain traces of water"?
Regarding the German Wiki 35 humans suffer from aquagenic urticaria [1] and regarding a news magazine water could be life-threatening for at least a British woman [2].
[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassernesselsucht [2] https://www.welt.de/vermischtes/article160308701/Wenn-Trinken-toedlich-ist.h...
Am 10.02.2019 um 11:24 schrieb Aniket Pradhan:
Hello Everyone!
I am Aniket Pradhan, username: major, who wrote "lsd" and initiated the discussion.
I would like to thank everyone for their input on this matter.
I agree with the others, that this IS a silly little script. I wrote it when I was learning shell programming. I published it to the AUR because it was going to be my first package here, and I wanted to keep it simple.
The reason I started the discussion was that I was not given enough time to decide whether to delete the package or to rename it (or if it was my decision or some other TUs). The reason also stated "not useful enough" which was very ambiguous to me. But, I guess that is resolved now since "There is no such procedure to follow when deleting packages", quoted from Eli. I never wanted this to become such big an issue. I just wanted to discuss on the ethicality of the deletion. To be honest, I never wanted to contest for that name "lsd", because I know that my script is very "trivial".
I would like to thank everyone, again, for participating in this discussion and giving your feedback. <3. (Thank you, Alad for reminding me to add an epilepsy warning).
Thanks for adding the warning.
Alad
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:52:58 +0100, alad via aur-general wrote:
Thanks for adding the warning.
There are tendencies to add way too much unneeded warnings nowadays, so people tend to ignore warnings completely, also those warnings, that are really important. Are you sure, that the script could generate something that really could be an issue for at least a few people suffering from photosensitive epilepsy or is it just another "you never know" warning? "You never know" warnings, as well as warnings with a deterrent effect are counter-productive. It would be good, if health labels would be used, when they are really needed, so more people still would care about warnings.
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org