mike3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Dec 7, 2:06 pm, "Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hmm, so does this mean that the reason why GNU deserves credit >> in the _name_ and not somewhere else is because GNU's contribution >> is so significant -- they pretty much built most of the rest of the >> system? >> >> The GNU project deserves credit not only because the GNU project wrote >> the GNU operating system, but also because they named it. One does >> not go about calling BSD for System V, despite them being very >> similar. > > I wasn't questioning that the GNU project deserved credit, > I was wondering why the credit should be *in the name* -- > note that well. Why is the **name** the proper place as > opposed to somewhere else?
Why "opposed"? Give credit wherever it is appropriate. The name has the advantage that it is a comparatively effective location. But that does not mean that you should omit the credit elsewhere where it would belong. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
