Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Dominique Michel <dominique.michel@×××××××××.ch>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new herd: theology
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:05:25
Message-Id: 20070427200225.7ad15493@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new herd: theology by Alexandre Buisse
1 Le Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:59:25 +0200,
2 Alexandre Buisse <nattfodd@g.o> a écrit :
3
4 > On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 11:25:01 +0200, Duncan wrote:
5 > > > It's a very good question, it was posed at the time, it was never
6 > > > answered and at last we can now say it was almost completely ignored.
7 > >
8 > > I (and I expect others who know) didn't answer this before, as it would
9 > > have been too easy to start an OT subthread I didn't want to start, but I
10 > > trust everyone minding the CoC will prevent that from occurring now.
11 > >
12 > > Briefly (and intended to be neutrally), the Latter Day Saints, commonly
13 > > known as the Mormons (maybe other groups as well??), have a religious
14 > > interest in genealogy, so having it in the religion/theology herd would
15 > > make sense to them. That should answer the question, and give a place to
16 > > start for those interested in looking it up.
17 >
18 > And a sect from the remote regions of Lapland believes that haskell is
19 > a godsend and adore the ghc source code as their Holy Scripture, should
20 > we move the haskell herd to theology as well?
21 >
22 >
23 > > However, I agree the sciences or a general humanities herd will make more
24 > > sense to most folks. I don't feel strongly enough about it to be worth
25 > > arguing a maintainer's choice of herd for their packages, however. After
26 > > all, they're the ones taking responsibility for it in the tree,
27 > > regardless of the herd it's in, and if it's more convenient for them in a
28 > > theology herd, why should it be a problem for those not interested in the
29 > > package? It might raise a few eyebrows here or there, but if it's being
30 > > well maintained, there are more critical things to argue about.
31 >
32 > Sure, there are more critical things out there, but why should people,
33 > on such a critical subject, chose to label packages that have nothing to
34 > do with religion with a "theology" stamp?
35
36 I fully agree, theology is the worst possible name if the herd will include
37 both religious and scientific softwares.
38
39 Human beings have the unique possibility to use their critical mind (at least
40 if they understand at we have this unique feature in the creation), and
41 all the theology are based on the assumption at they are true only if we give
42 away our critical mind (Introduction of all the religious book, they said at it
43 is true because it is true...). And they cannot be true otherwise.
44
45 Religion: the prophet prove the religion and the religion prove the prophet.
46 Science: the theory is true only if it is proved by practical and reproductible
47 experimentation.
48
49 Words have a meaning. The fact is at genealogy is a science as it is possible
50 to prove it by practical experimentation, and it doesn't matter if the father
51 is a Mormon or the currier, an ADN prove will tell us. And for that it have
52 nothing to do with religious ideology. Theology is about religious study and
53 cannot be proved by practical and reproductible experimentation. For that, it
54 have nothing to do with science.
55
56 Otherwise: I think at it is a good idea to have that kind of softwares, but I
57 also think at the name of the herd is one of the worst the worst possible.
58 Please, don't call it with a name that is a direct reference to religious
59 ideology if you want to mix those different kind of softwares. I think at
60 at the best solution will be to make 2 herds, one for the religious ideology,
61 one for human-sciences, so at we can know what we are talking about.
62
63 It was my 2c. contribution on that matter.
64
65 Ciao,
66 Dominique
67 >
68 > /Alexandre
69 --
70 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: new herd: theology Steve Dibb <beandog@g.o>