murks wrote:If someone is offended he can just fork the whole thing and call it 'free löve'
No fork needed. Those libraries are only part of the community, not of LÖVE proper. Someone could start another community focussed around making LÖVE games.
murks wrote:I have to seriously question my sanity when I read that django replaces all occurences of master and slave with leader and follower: [...] I could argue that find 'leader follower' far more offensive than 'master slave',
Actually, they replaced it with primary and replica, if you read until the end.
I know that i shouldn't start the flame war again, but i do like to say that i'm making a game with a friend (he's the artist) and I like telling him things like: "I have a major update for our game I'm now using AnAL and COCK for our game and then he laughs and then I laugh and he totally doesn't mind, he finds it funny, that's all.
So I am probably one of the few that would encourage people to name their librarys in a similiar way, but I do now the problems that come with it.
I apologize that I'm dredging this discussion back up. I haven't read through the entire thread but I wanted to share my opinion all the same.
I am currently teaching a bunch of 13-14 year-olds game programming using LOVE. The vulgar naming of libraries has a negative effect on my ability to teach. I don't want to encourage the kids to have a look at the libraries online (which I would do to make them more independent programmers and to read the documentation) because it would be a huge distraction to the kids while I'm trying to teach them.
Furthermore, it would undermine my authority, not only in the eyes of the kids but with the other teachers. I am a student myself so I was putting myself on the line by getting them to use LOVE rather than something like PyGame or GameMaker. This makes the framework that I've vouched for look immature, unprofessional, and unsuitable for the young children who will be using it (LOVE will soon be used with 11-12 year olds at the school too, potentially even younger).
It's not a huge deal but it's unnecessary to make the library names so rude. If you are making a library please consider that although a rude name might not actually offend anyone it can still have a negative impact on LOVE.
georgeprosser wrote:I apologize that I'm dredging this discussion back up. I haven't read through the entire thread but I wanted to share my opinion all the same.
I am currently teaching a bunch of 13-14 year-olds game programming using LOVE. The vulgar naming of libraries has a negative effect on my ability to teach. I don't want to encourage the kids to have a look at the libraries online (which I would do to make them more independent programmers and to read the documentation) because it would be a huge distraction to the kids while I'm trying to teach them.
Furthermore, it would undermine my authority, not only in the eyes of the kids but with the other teachers. I am a student myself so I was putting myself on the line by getting them to use LOVE rather than something like PyGame or GameMaker. This makes the framework that I've vouched for look immature, unprofessional, and unsuitable for the young children who will be using it (LOVE will soon be used with 11-12 year olds at the school too, potentially even younger).
It's not a huge deal but it's unnecessary to make the library names so rude. If you are making a library please consider that although a rude name might not actually offend anyone it can still have a negative impact on LOVE.
I'm thinking of this thread a lot these days, as I made a networking library and named it "Affair" - because I like the idea of having funny names that are related to Love. Because of this thread I figured I'd name it something that isn't considered rude or offensive, even by those who are easily offended (for networking, it's very easy to think of "worse" names... ). But it's stll "weird" in the context of 12 year olds - what do you think?
adrix89 wrote:12 years olds watch porn nowadays.
I don't see how you can treat children as innocent in this day and age.
Actually, that wouldn't be my issue here. If I had kids, I don't think I would have problems explaining these things and words to them, if they would stumble accross them.
The problem georgeprosser - I think - has is maily with the parents and the school/teachers. There are just some who don't want their kids to be exposed to this kind of thing. And then having to deal with all the overhead involved with the administration (what if parents complain that their kids learned these words at school, for example) would be quite annoying...
georgeprosser, on the other hand, it has been suggested a few times in this thread to just rename libraries - they're mostly released under licenses which allow you to do that, as long as you credit the original author (I believe). You could simply set up a git repository with all the libs you want your pupils to use and give them that link. Then they would not have to search through threads upon threads of posts to find the libraries...
Germanunkol wrote:You could simply set up a git repository with all the libs you want your pupils to use and give them that link. Then they would not have to search through threads upon threads of posts to find the libraries...
I think someone already has done that, although I forget who and where.
Germanunkol wrote:You could simply set up a git repository with all the libs you want your pupils to use and give them that link. Then they would not have to search through threads upon threads of posts to find the libraries...
I think someone already has done that, although I forget who and where.
