| From: | "Robert Edmonds" <edmonds@debian.org> |
| Date: | Tue, 11 Jul 2017 21:10:55 -0400 |
| To: | bind9-bugs@isc.org |
| Subject: | [ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk: Bug#867570: Please relegate "groper" to a historical footnote] |
Hi,
I'm forwarding the following bug from the Debian bug tracker
(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=867570).
My own suggestion is "domain information gatherer"
(https://twitter.com/rsedmonds/status/789997702855684097).
----- Forwarded message from Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> -----
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:32:16 +0100
From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#867570: Please relegate "groper" to a historical footnote
Package: dnsutils
Version: 1:9.9.5.dfsg-9+deb8u7
The dig(1) manpage starts:
DESCRIPTION
dig (domain information groper) is a flexible tool for ...
I think this use of `groper' is not very nice. While the verb `grope'
can also be used without non-sexual connotations, I don't think that's
really true of `groper' - certainly, in this particular case.
It would be nicer to say `domain information grabber' or `domain
information getter' or something, even if it's ahistorical. The
original name could be mentioned in a historical note in the source
tree or something.
Thanks,
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Robert Edmonds
edmonds@debian.org