Why would there be any issues with that name? No special characters, and not even mixed case.

Just curious, since the package name contains a derogatory name.

I don't think it's derogatory, merely profane. If it were derogatory I might have an issue with it, but I think this case is fine. Others might not be, but that's another kettle of fish.

Yeah, I remembered things like sextractor coming up before so I asked that it be ticketed for us to look at as a group.

Both ralph and I replied to this on the mailing list thinking that the name would be okay as it's both the upstream package name and the upstream language name.

We haven't met in a few weeks due to various people being away. However, I count 4 FPC opinions that the name brainfuck would be okay.

If we could have one more FPC member say they don't have a problem with the name brainfuck I think this can safely be closed and the packager continue with getting this in.

spidey sense tingles considering potential subjective censorship (which is outside packaging guidelines, more a policy issue anyway), so +1 ok by me.

From a FPC standpoint, we see no problems with using brainfuck as the package name. Go ahead and continue your packaging efforts. Thanks!

I vaguely remember there being a problem with "bad words" being inside some emacs file years ago, and RHL/RHEL having to do an errata for it ... so it's possible the name might make it a no-go to get into RHEL, but I doubt anyone cares about that.