Mrugesh Karnik wrote:
On Wednesday 27 December 2006 23:56, Roshan wrote:
--- Mrugesh Karnik mrugeshkarnik@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 http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html