> I think you severely over-estimate my power. I can't force > people to do anything. When the GDP makes terminology or I agree with Shaun for being a leader means herding cats most of the time.
While there could be many reasons put back and forth for or against calling the OS GNU/Linux or Linux it will always boil down to the argument of educational and promotional usage of "GNU". My personal reasons for raising the issue is that: 1. We had this discussion in our team. 2. Diverging from the upstream source is very straining on me. I cannot follow all the changes and it would be easier for me to have an agreement on this. 3. I've had quite enough flame wars. I also agree with Jason Clinton - there are very few places where the word "linux" is used at all in the interface of Gnome programs. If we take the modules in gnome-2-16 - most of them are indeed for the Linux kernel. The following is a very rough example of what I found. ekiga.gnome-2-14.bg.po:"Video4Linux is the most common choice if you own a webcam." evolution-data-server.HEAD.bg.po:"Show folders in short notation (e.g. c.o.linux rather than comp.os.linux)" gnome-terminal.HEAD.bg.po:msgid "Linux console" gnome-utils.HEAD.bg.po:msgid "ext2 for the linux native filesystem or fat for the DOS filesystem." gnome-utils.HEAD.bg.po:msgid "Linux Native (ext2)" gnome-volume-manager.HEAD.bg.po:"Note: You need Linux kernel 2.6 for volume management to work." (several more about SELinux, which is clearly kernel Linux). In the gnome-user-manual: Mentioned once, but is not user visible. (The word GNU is used several times more often). I have still not made any analysis on things outside the official packages. So - a rough consensus will be helpful. Things will work without it, but it will be easier for me to have it. Kind regards: al_shopov _______________________________________________ gnome-doc-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
