Have You Ever Contributed In Free Software Development?

[Tor]

I'm working in a company with lots of (proprieatary) development on Linux. I would say that all the top developers here have contributed to open source/free software projects at least once, and sometimes much more. That's not the same as the majority of the developers though: I haven't asked all of them.

 

[Exophase]

Your example is inappropriate. GNU developers have never decided to change the name of the project. So the true situation is the following: most people call your fried by an alias, which is very unpleasant to him.

Newsflash: Linux is not GNU's project. "Linux" is used to refer to an operating system that uses the Linux kernel, regardless of whether or not the system uses GNU software (either pre-loaded onto the hardware, as part of a distribution, or by an end user's decision). You can keep arguing until you're blue in the face that if there's GNU software on the system then the user must say he/she is using "GNU/Linux" but there is simply no rigid definition nor precedent that would mandate this, and the only people arguing for it are partial people using subjective arguments. The OS came into being as "Linux", it was not renamed from "GNU/Linux" because it was never originally called this - Stallman only began publicly insisting it be called "GNU/Linux" long after it had already been commonly called "Linux." So from the public's point of view it is GNU/FSF that is fighting, quite futilely and indefinitely, to have the commonly accepted name changed.

It would be interesting to see where all these arguments would have gone if say, Stallman dropped dead in 1990. Or where they'd go if he dropped dead today. I have a funny feeling that most of this wouldn't be talked about.

 

[sebt3]

It would to see where all these arguments would have gone if say, Stallman dropped dead in 1990. Or where they'd go if he dropped dead today. I have a funny feeling that most of this wouldn't be talked about.

Hi Exo,

Your points here remind me my 28th birthday. My wife though I would love talking with him in RL. So she setup a meeting in a restaurant in Boston with him.
In the first 5 minuts he argue how bad it is to be using a propritary BIOS and that is the only thing he dislike in his XO.
Then he argue that I'm killing free software because of my job (I'm an Oracle DBA). I answer that you have to get a meal 2 time a day, there is not enough job for free software entousiast...

This was the day I realized that RMS have stopped to be the great hacker he was once to become some kind of freedom evangelist in a world which took 1984 as a manual....


Edit : on topic (oups sorry)
I voted yes :
- I've written patch for free software
- I've maintain my own little free software (until it become useless for me)
- I bug report from time to time
But I tend to care less and less, and I didn't done the 2 first for years....

 

[Vitel]

The OS came into being as "Linux", it was not renamed from "GNU/Linux" because it was never originally called this.

Wrong. The operating system originally was called GNU. Linux is just a misleading alias.

Stallman only began publically insisting it be called "GNU/Linux" long after it had already been commonly called "Linux."

Right, commonly called by a wrong alias, but not by the true name.

 

[crade]

Technically I have my own software project, and it is GPL, but I think it only has 2 users

 

[Dunny]

I voted yes -

I've developed my own free software, and I've also made the source code to my software available under a PD license.

D.

 

[crade]

Wrong. The operating system originally was called GNU. Linux is just a misleading alias.

The GNU OS is different, they are still working on it, Linux is more like a fork. Someone (or a bunch of people) used what they had done (since it was supposed to be free), gave credit for what they used, added a whole bunch of stuff and gave it a new name. Isn't there a thread for this?

 

[gp32rich]

Are all linux fanatics this anal? Or is it just nerds that enjoy a good argument but refuse to back down / shake hands or need to have the last word.


I'm sure there were people having the same arguments over Hoover/vacuum cleaner fifty years ago.
If a name is picked and used by a majority then that's the name that stands whether there's a more correct name or not and you're pissing in the wind to get everyone to change.


In fact - I always say 'lie-nucks' just because that's how it looks (as in diner, miner, liner, etc.) but nobody questions it (because of how I look)




I voted yes. I bug reported, created free and open (and wantonly-unlicensed) stuff. Whatever

 

[Exophase]

Are all linux fanatics this anal?

No, they aren't, and the usual FiloSoFy doesn't really help their image ;p

 

[Vitel]

Wrong. The operating system originally was called GNU. Linux is just a misleading alias.

The GNU OS is different, they are still working on it, Linux is more like a fork. Someone (or a bunch of people) used what they had done (since it was supposed to be free), gave credit for what they used, added a whole bunch of stuff and gave it a new name. Isn't there a thread for this?

True and it has already been mentioned above (by Exophase, AFAIR). Linux is a separate creature. That's why the correct term is 'GNU/Linux' and not just 'GNU'.

 

[paddy]

GNU is the body - Linux is the brain ... for any time that both go together i would imagine you really have to mention both in the title ,i mean can linux run without GNU ? but i think GNU is a self contained OS all of it's own without a graphics user interface or does it need Hurd kernal ?,and yes the last part that does the make up/clothes if you will is ubuntu or anyother style theme and feature set.I am sorry if i am wrong ,i really don't claim to know that much but i still agree with Vitel ,is it not true that GNU is the foundation of anything linux is ,so why should it just be Linux/Ubuntu ? if it's a part of the GNU then it should be stated ,mabe not in every day life but well anyway i could be wrong and yes i prolly am wrong but i may as well put my thoughts across.


Ohh and one last thing ,since i have been getting into Linux in general LOL HMM GNU-Linux distros in general i have found alot of this type of stand off talk in forums and it really makes the new user quite scared to ask anything about GNU Linux ,asking for help and saying the wrong thing can land you with a right burning ,people are really way too heavy about this and it really makes the whole GNU-Linux scene seem more mr nerd smarty pants than something
anyone can contribute tk i don't want to get into an argument with anyone over what i have said ,like i say i am still learning all this stuff and if i am wrong then simply just say Paddy your wrong ,read this or ... don't post as you don't get it and you are wasting paper.

kk guys its all fun.


Paddy

 

[Tor]

Wrong. The operating system originally was called GNU. Linux is just a misleading alias.

The GNU OS is different, they are still working on it, Linux is more like a fork. Someone (or a bunch of people) used what they had done (since it was supposed to be free), gave credit for what they used, added a whole bunch of stuff and gave it a new name. Isn't there a thread for this?

Sigh. GNU existed quite a while before Linux came along. Linux was originally the Linux kernel plus gcc version 1.42 (iirc) which Linus cross-compiled so to have something to start with. All the other components (user-level applications, libraries, tools) came along after a while, many of them didn't at first come from GNU even. After Linux had been around some time (long enough to have become well-known and "established"), and having adopted more and more GNU tools for the complete OS (the kernel + tools, libs, etc.) RMS came along with the idea of "GNU/Linux" as the stopgap 'GNU system' until GNU/Hurd became usable. At that point GNU (which would be GNU/Hurd) had been worked on for years, long before Linux was began by Linus. And so on and so forth.
Wikipedia is reasonably accurate on their description of GNU: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU

(I started following the Linux development about November 1991, and installed 0.95c on my main workstation in April 1992, after first trying with 386BSD in January. Been with Linux since then.)

Edit: My memory is slightly hazy, it could be that I first installed 0.95a when it came out.
-Tor

 

[crade]

^ Isn't that what I said?

 

[Tor]

Maybe we mean different things by "fork"!