a long rebuttal to the Linux-is-the-engine fallacy
olivares14031 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 28 00:54:33 UTC 2008
> At the time, RMS had no reason to suggest any such thing.
> When he was
> suggesting names for Linus' kernel, the difference
> between the GNU OS
> and the then-unnamed kernel was a common understanding.
> People had not
> yet begun to incorrectly refer to the GNU OS as Linux.
It is hard to determine what the future holds, but from the very beginning of a project, one has to set precedents. Let's say you create something and give it a name, and your friend gives it another name. Your friends name is more popular than the name you selected. The people call the something by your friends name. Is there something wrong with that?
A friend gave me a cat, I named the cat and my mom also gave a name to the cat. I called the cat with the name I gave, it did not come and acknowledge me. But when my mom called it, it would go to her. I did get angry
In the quest to find more and more answers and the threads about the naming controversy, there is not much to do, but continue. It is too late to ask for a name change. There is not much we can do to help. The arguments can go back and forth. Users that want to learn more about the issues may visit
for those users that are first coming in to the discussion, the original question was "Why Fedora was a non/Free distribution?" as GNU recommends/acknowledges
It is a stake in the heart to Fedora users because they truly do a great deal to make sure programs are free and not patent encumbered. But that is another thing. One of the reasons given was that Fedora included some firmware that was not free :(
More information about the fedora-list