Re: Changing "Linux" with "GNU/Linux" or "GNU"

[Yavor Doganov <yavor doganov org>]

Murray Cumming wrote:
> 
> At what places does the documentation even mention Linux or GNU/Linux?

I didn't mean the documentation, although it is most probably affected
as well.  I was talking about strings in applications, such as:

The Linux version does not have this restriction. (GCompris)
GPM adds mouse support to text-based Linux applications such the
Midnight Commander. (system-tools-backends)
The most common archive format on UNIX and Linux systems is the tar
archive. (File Roller)
Linux mailers cannot do this task... (Evolution)
Video-Conferencing application for Linux and other Unices (Ekiga)

I've always translated "Linux" in these cases as "GNU/Linux".  Our
team leader suggested to file bugs and asked on the i18n ML.
Christian Rose replied that this is a terminology issue that is GDP
territory.  So, if GDP decides on this -- which is our request -- we
could file bugs so the strings would be fixed in English and all
translated languages.

Joachim Noreiko wrote:
> 
> I agree that it's important to be precise, especially in
> documentation. If there's potential for confusion with the term
> 'linux', then it should be cleared up.

There is an ongoing confusion for years, which is harmful for the Free
Software Movement, so I'm glad that you think so.

> (However, I can't help thinking the boat's sailed on this
> one. Everybody says linux, and pushing another term on people feels
> somewhat Canute-like -- to mix ocean-based metaphors -- especially
> when 'linux' is a snappy and catchy word, while 'GNU' is ugly, hard
> to pronounce, and is only pretending to be an acronym.)

It is true that the boat has sailed long ago.  But we must do our best
to change the name and the flag of the vessel while she's at sea.  If
projects like GNOME don't do it, who else?  I think "GNU" is much
shorter and easier to pronounce than "Linux", but that's not important
and of course, YMMV.  Even if it was the ugliest and the most
difficult word in the world, we should stick with it.

This doesn't oblige all users to read the GNU Philosophy (although
it'll be superb if they do), just to have the chance to do it, if they
want and if they care.  Unfortunately, a huge portion of people do not
know anything about GNU.  A lot of these people use GNU/Linux.

> By the way, the new version of the GNOME User Guide has a section on
> contributing to GNOME. 

It is gnome2-user-guide/C/gosfeedback.xml, right?

> I don't remember if I wrote much about the ideals and goals of free
> software, but if you want to contribute a few lines, please do.

I'm willing to write something, but I fear that with 

> There aren't many places in docs for banner-waving, but that one is.

this attitude it won't be accepted.  I want to write about the reasons
why the GNOME Project was started, and about the danger of "Open
Source", which constantly threatens to bury the Free Software ideals
and turn them into something completely different and insignificiant.

This is not banner-waving: we should not take freedom for granted --
it has to be protected by all possible means.  Users have to fight for
it.  But how if they don't know what it is?

Jason D. Clinton wrote:
> 
> There are /very/ few mentions of Linux in our documentation. This is not
> worth fighting over. 

As I wrote above, I see the problem mainly in the user interface.  And
it's not a fight because we love to fight, really.  

> File a bug in each module, if you want, and then let the module
> maintainer decide what to do.

But some developers are more concerned about the practical advantages
of Free Software and don't care about freedom issues much.  Such
developers will mark the bug WONTFIX or will close it, without a
policy, adopted by GDP.

> In gnome-games we have only one occurrence of the word "Linux" in
> our documentation and I'm more apt to remove it than anything else.

I will be grateful if you do this.

-- 
JID: doganov jabber minus273 org