Re: RFC - GNU System Distribution

[John Williams]

On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 16:51 +0200, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> Please, this is just unproductive, the GNU system has was named by
> Richard in 1984, lets keep it like that.

I would like to move this debate along, as I don't believe that it is
unproductive.

I appreciate the points being made on all sides of this debate.  Let me
try to summarise.  If I misrepresent your opinion or position, please
send corrections to the list.

1.  Barry wants to name an entity in the same class as (what is known in
the popular press as)  a Linux distribution (or a BSD distribution, or
whatever)

2.  Responders to his idea seem to believe that he is talking about
renaming either (1) the community that produces the software, or (2) the
"system".  

3.  Barry is talking about things from a consumer point of view, others
are taking a producer's point of view.  Barry is saying "let's talk to
people in a language they understand" and others are saying "no, let's
teach them new words and concepts".

4. "System" is highly ambiguous.  When we say "GNU is not Unix" this
begs the question "what is Unix"?  It is certainly not a kernel, a
product you can buy, or an ISO you can download.  It is a computing
platform (software) in the broadest sense of the word, perhaps most
usefully defined as a set of interfaces (POSIX).  All this is geek-speak
of the highest order.

5. People able to differentiate between Windows, Mac OS, GNU/Linux etc.
understand the term "Operating System".  Nowadays the distinction
between what we think of as an OS and the applications bundled with it
are becoming blurred.  But people understand the difference between OSs
in an operative sense like this:  A: "Hey, I've found this really neat
software that fulfils my innermost desires!"  B: "Cool!  Does it run on
Macs?".

6. All the above leads me to conclude that we should call it (what Barry
is talking about) the "GNU OS".  For those with American accents, this
of course expands to "(guh) new OS", or "New Operating System".  To me
GNU is a collection of software that embodies and implements
socio-political principles in addition to IT/CS principles.  We should
distinguish between "a bunch of software" and an operating system.

7. We should not publicise the existence of the GNU OS until it is in a
state where one can download a bootable CD or DVD image, pop it in the
drive of a computer with an unformatted hard drive, install it, and end
up with a GUI login to (probably) a GNOME session.  The GNOME session
should provide ethernet access to the Internet and run the most useful
free software for end users:  Email, WWW browser, IM client and Office
suite.  (OpenOffice?  GNOME Office?).  

OK, that last point was just a wish.  But how far away are we from
achieving this?  And I presume in all this we are talking about the
kernel being the Hurd, not Linux?

I am sorry if I am being naive and stupid by butting in here.  I have
been waiting 20 years for the release of what I think of as the GNU OS.
I want it to happen, and I am willing to help, but I am a very poor
programmer.  Is there room for a non-programmer to help in this project?

thanks for listening,

John

-- 
John Williams
Research Analyst
Department of Marketing, Otago University
http://www.commerce.otago.ac.nz/marketing/staff/williamsj.html