On 2015-01-11 3:59 am, Mikael Nordfeldth wrote:
2015-01-11 11:10 skrev Adam Moore:
But the name sucks.
You're welcome to use the software, apply patches which relabel it to
front-end users and start attracting sheeple to your GNU herd or
whatever ;)
The freedom of free software, isn't it awesome?
Honestly, I doubt developers hesitate to patch things because of the
project's name. I agree end users might care what their service is
called. But then again, we have _many_ users who don't use "GNU
social" but use "Quitter" instead (still fully interoperable).
Of the many "Quitter" themed sites, the https://quitter.se/ logo isn't
even a GNU (as with the qvitter GNU social plugin they're
developing[1]) but two chillin' out maxin' birds instead.
But thanks for the enthusiastic suggestion. :)
[1] http://github.com/hannesmannerheim/qvitter
While I agree that the GNUsocial "brand" might have some issues (anyone
present in the IRC channel has seen some confused chatters looking to
shoot the breeze), I don't think GNU herds would help address most of
the symptoms you've brought up. In fact, I feel like attaching "GNU" to
any project generally confuses the non-technically minded.
I do love the idea of experimenting on an instance. Technically, we
could change all of the terminology and branding per-instance without
causing any administrative overhead at the project level. On FragDev,
we're currently still using the basic StatusNet layout, but I'd be
willing to give something else a try if our users were interested.
Thanks for starting up such an interesting discussion!
- Windigo
