[hdjjhhvvhga]

I'm not sure if you are being serious or not. You don't need the logo for anything. And as for terminology, the "rec" part stands for (database) records, not "rectum" or whatever one might imagine. I mean, seriously, what's the problem with just grabbing the code and using it if it's useful and the license has been approved by your company?

[dahart]

> And as for terminology, the "rec" part stands for (database) records, not "rectum" or whatever one might imagine.

Why are you assuming the pun wasn’t intentional, and that both meanings aren’t implied? What exactly is the point of talking about male turtles copulating in the FAQ?

There is nothing wrong with ignoring the logo and just using the code, that isn’t the issue. The issue is the story of the logo & FAQ are intentionally controversial, even if the author only intended humor, and that loading the site and using the code at work would promote conversation about the topic of the logo and it’s narrative.

[hdjjhhvvhga]

> and that loading the site and using the code at work would promote conversation about the topic of the logo and it’s narrative.

Or we could be adults and treat it in the way we treat any peculiar thing in a corporate environment, that is, ignore it and move on to what is actually needed? I've been in such situations quite a few times (mixed male/female environment, some old guys and young interns), and the maximum you could count on was a "well, that's an interesting choice", but most often people would just completely ignore it. We're not in elementary school to shout, "look, copulating turtles!"

On the other hand, I see your point. People got extremely cautious over the years because of real and perceived harassment attempts and their consequences. I can understand showing this page at work could be perceived by some in the same way as the famous dongle joke on a Python conference.

[dahart]

You’re lucky! I’ve definitely worked places where supposedly adult people made many constant tasteless jokes around sex and homosexuality, and about women while speaking to women, where the environment was actually hostile and the “adults” truly didn’t even know it and thought their conduct was okay. The problem with saying “we could be adults” is that many many people disagree on what it means to be adult, it’s a criteria that’s too vague and indirect. Counting on people being adults is what we’ve tried and failed at for, I dunno, hundreds of years? Forever? BTW, I don’t think just showing the page at work is the issue, the issue is talking about it, and that is something that would happen.

[rgoulter]

I think GP meant "Selection Expression", abbreviated as "SEX" in the manual. https://www.gnu.org/software/recutils/manual/

[mywittyname]

Who is going to read the manual on an obscure program used in a shell script somewhere? Mostly likely, another dev whose never encountered recutils before, and probably long after the OG developer is gone.

The command itself is a `recsel -e`. Which is not even remotely humorous, unlike, say, `dwarfdump`.