On Wednesday 27 December 2006 23:56, Roshan wrote:
--- Mrugesh Karnik
<mrugeshkarnik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have a better solution. Avoid this war
entirely
and simply use the words "A
Linux based Distribution". It could apply to "A
FreeBSD based Distribution"
too.
Agreed. But, considering the fact, that most of the
distros (under consideration in the wiki) have maximum
GPLed software, prefixing it GNU, wouldn't be wrong?
Would it be?
Disclaimer
NOTE: I'm not being a fanatic, or forcing GNU over it.
It is only a question.
Mentioning that the software uses the GNU GPL license is way different than
saying that its a GNU software. I believe that only the software that's
developed directly by the GNU project should be called GNU software. Since
we're talking of the desktop, which might be dominated by software that is
not GNU software, it is wrong to simply term the whole distro to be a GNU
operating system.
Another point is, if you're linking to a GNU page explaining why it should be
GNU/Linux, why not also link to a page that argues otherwise? If such a page
does not exist, create one yourself. If you can't, don't link to the GNU
page. In essence, don't cause this war. Give credit where it is due. If
you're talking to some user working on the shell, of course it is to be
mentioned that it is the GNU bash shell. Why would you force the term `GNU'
where non-GNU software will be used in majority?
Guys keep it simple. Windows users who are victims of software piracy do
not read licences.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of
use." - PC Magazine