Why not drop the Core from Fedora Core?

[Steffan Jacobs]

Thiago Vinhas de Moraes wrote:

>Em Qua, 2004-02-18 às 16:03 -0500, Alan Cox escreveu:
>  
>
>>On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 05:44:55PM -0300, Thiago Vinhas de Moraes wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I really could not understand the decision of the OS name to be Fedora
>>>Core. People cannot even guess what the hell it is. Is it a game? An
>>>ISP? A super computer?
>>>
>>>Can anyone explain why the core in fedora core? Why not Fedora Linux, or
>>>just Fedora 2 for the next release?
>>>      
>>>
>>Fedora
>>	Core
>>	Extras
>>	Alternatives
>>	Legacy
>>
>>Not "alternatives" means Fedora might not always just be Linux - if someone
>>wants to do a Fedora on a BSD kernel, hurd or something new why limit it
>>    
>>
>
>So, why not Fedora System or Fedora OS? As Fedora should be an
>international operating system, it's important to use a terminology that
>non-american and non-britsh people can understand. For me, personally,
>the word Core can be a lot of things, but not a operating system.
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
I've thought about this before and my opinion is this: it's ok (and 
appropriate) to talk about "Fedora Core" when you're talking about the 
actual Core packages/ CD's containing them etc, etc. However the OS 
should be named "Fedora" because as soon as Fedora Extras, Alternatives 
and Legacy become available any Fedora user might also be using any of 
those packages as part of his/her "official" Fedora installation. The OS 
you're using is then no longer "Fedora Core" but "Fedora". So for my 
point of view the Fedora Project is offering Fedora Core iso's to 
install the Fedora OS. (it's a little vague even for me but that's the 
way I'm seeing it and using the terms right now).