I’ve always thought this would be helpful for small in-house ops scripts and things like that, but unfortunately the logo and terminology makes this a bit to risqué for a corporate environment. I suppose that’s part of the GNU spirit!
So much of the entire industry already relies on GNU code that I think that baring licensing issues no one ever got fired for choosing the GNU option. You know it will work and it will probably work well, forever.
1. I once went to an RMS talk where he said that the whole point of writing your own software was "so that you can give it a funny name". Which I take as good advice! :)
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.
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.
The command itself is a `recsel -e`. Which is not even remotely humorous, unlike, say, `dwarfdump`.
I'm almost positive that if we dig in a modern project dependency tree deep enough we'll find at least a couple that have an inappropriate joke in the readme or in the documentation. So how would recutils be any different?
Unfortunately, that argument is entirely straw man. Most corporate environments are absolutely fine with memorable non-functional logos. The issue is the narrative about gay turtle sex and perhaps the implied suggestion that the “rec” in recutils might stand for rectum.
In my personal life, I’m comfortable discussing turtles and rectums and sex and homosexuality. But I don’t want to discuss those topics at work with my co-workers, and most corporate environments aren’t just avoiding them for fun because they’re a bunch of stiffs, they’re avoiding such topics because there is a history of them causing actual problems at work, often lead to hurt feelings and the sense that the environment is not welcoming to all, and as a result there are several ways they’re legally required to encourage employees to avoid discussing such topics, and legally required to take disciplinary action if someone complains that someone else made negative comments about gay turtles or sex.
BTW this is all a side point to the fact that this photograph of turtles makes a terrible logo. It doesn’t work as a small icon or with reduced colors. It has no shape or symbolism. It’s unrelated to the product. It’s hard to see the detail even as a large full color image. The only thing that makes this logo memorable is the FAQ text, the story that it’s gay copulating turtles, which for all we know isn’t even true - turtles sometimes climb over each other, sometimes fight, and there’s no way to identify the sex of the turtles from this photo.