> >From the Linux developer point of view it's really about theft of credit > (and I've heard the same from X11 people). The FSF tries to steal the > credit for the Linux OS despite having been actively anti-Linux in the > early days. There are two reasons it does this. The first is that the > FSF made some terrible design and planning decisions in the 1980s and > turned down the offer of UZI to pursue an implausible dream based on > Mach, blowing its own OS project out of the water. The second is the > laudible aim of wanting to make sure people understand the whole freedom > thing is important. I share this same opinion about GNU/Linux debate. How would you get Free Software idea from GNU/Linux? Why are we trying to equilize GNU with Free Software? Isn't free software an idea or philoshopy? What GNU has something to do with that? I'm not saying that GNU or FSF is meaninless, I do believe and know that it has a great and very important role in this movement. But it's not Free Software (tm), is it? You can understand Linux is a Free Software without even knowing what GNU is. And I believe the problem occurs due to this. If I won't call it GNOME/Linux (since Linux is meaningless for me, with some elaboration, without GNOME) or KDE/Linux, I oppose the idea of using GNU/Linux. I hope board would look at issue in this point of view as well.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part