On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 08:17 +0000, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > Behdad, Hi Sergey,
> First of all, I am sorry for using the wrong list. But I thought that > position expressed the views of the Foundation, so the Foundation > should be aware... Well, almost everything in GNOME expresses the views of the Foundation, but we don't go to the membership for every simple decision. > > I think that sentence is very accurate. And it doesn't state them as > > synonyms, no. It's the same as "GNU/Linux (commonly referred to as > > Linux)" you find on http://www.gnome.org/about/. The first term is the > > preferred/correct one while the one in brackets helps connecting a > > phrase familiar to many people. I personally don't have any problem > > with either one. > I think it is entirely against the spirit of Free Software (the way > RMS usually represents it). Note that not every GNOME contributor / foundation member agrees with that view. There are many people that don't think we need to emphasize the freedom to compete with other desktop projects. I think the foundation as an entity should focus on what it's supposed to do. According to [1]: [T]he Foundation will coordinate releases of GNOME and determine which projects are part of GNOME. The Foundation will act as an official voice for the GNOME project, providing a means of communication with the press and with commercial and noncommercial organizations interested in GNOME software. The foundation may produce educational materials and documentation to help the public learn about GNOME software. In addition, it may sponsor GNOME-related technical conferences, and represent GNOME at relevant conferences sponsored by others, help create technical standards for the project and promote the use and development of GNOME software. [1] http://foundation.gnome.org/ > Instead of emphasysing the difference > between ethics of freedom - and just development model - that sentence > implicitly removes that difference - and shows that for GNOME that > difference does not matter. I think you are reading too much into it. It's just the front page after all. There's no room to make a point about Free Software vs Open Source difference right there. > If it IS the case - GNOME probably should > take the first letter in the name off (and pull out of the GNU > Project). FWIW, GNOME can just be renamed to "Gnome Network Object Model Environment". As for pulling out of GNU, I don't think anyone sees much problem doing that. Don't get me wrong. I'm a huge supporter of GNU, and am in good relations with FSF, maintain a couple GNU packages, and am an associate member. What I'm saying is that GNOME being part of GNU is symbolic at best. Neither project uses resources from the other one or anything. I don't see any point breaking that symbolic relation for something as simple as the original issue you raised. > If it is not - the difference should be articulated, don't > you think? I know, that mistake (FS ~= OSS) is made my many uneducated > people. But we in GNOME are educated about these things, aren't we? Just to get it out of the way, I suggest rewording to... Umm, was going to suggest something like "GNOME is Free Software and developed as Open Source" or something, but checking front page right now, seems like someone already removed that sentence for good. Done. There's still the "Linux" vs "GNU/Linux" issue remaining. I said I fix that this weekend. > Regards, > > Sergey -- behdad http://behdad.org/ "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 _______________________________________________ gnome-web-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-web-list
