[Nottingham] NLUG: What's in a name?

[Martin]

> I'd say keep it simple and a bit fuzzy, and let the arguments happen over
> the beers.

Good comments all round and I'm tending to agree to keeping to
"friendly everyday usage" of the terms rather than going pure and
exact and exactingly unfriendly.


Our website has been up for long enough now that it can hardly be
called 'new' any more. So I think we're overdue for revamping the
welcoming words on the front page. Any takers for putting some
friendly words together? Gently include a 'disclaimer' that Linux is
built from many parts and very many contributions of which GNU and the
Linux kernel are a part of the whole system? (Better wording than that
needed!)

Further ideas?

Thanks folks for all the good thought and discussion.


For my own opinion:

I'm feeling that the "GNU" part, even with it's vital great
significance and greater history, has been eclipsed by the critical
significance of the GPL, FSF and "copyleft". GNU and the GNU tool
chain are still a vital part of a 'bundle' that we generally describe
as Linux, but also times move on. Perhaps we do need to evolve from
the (now outdated?) GNU/Linux nomenclature for all except geekie OS
circles?

Just for the sound of it, "Linux" does sound a lot easier and more
'sexy' than an old style recursive acronym. I guess also that a sleek
Tux mascot is more amenable to friendly customisations and is warmly
welcomed when compared to an old woolly horned beast! And perhaps all
that does fit well in that those that know can quietly appreciate the
inner workings. The rest of the world just gets to see that it all
works well.


Cheers,
Martin