[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 12:09:18AM +0100, Jeff Williams wrote:
> 2) the comprehensibility of our OS names to the pubic.
>    And it does not necessarily address how there can be multple
>    versions of these when you differentiate by the libc used as well.
>    I think sticking closer to the original idea of Debian GNU/KNetBSD
>    is actually the way to go, but perhaps the punctuation is what needs
>    tweaking. I know the first time I saw the uppercase K it immediately
>    made me think of KDE. For whatever reason this is what immediately
>    comes to mind when ever I see a uppercase K infront of an otherwise
>    familar name. And now the Gnome community has also started in the
>    practice of taking things that started with K to imply KDE and
>    putting a G infront instead[1].
>    What I propose to solve this is to lowercase the K. I think Debian
>    GNU/kNetBSD reads a little better. It takes the emphasis off the k.
>    And when adding the l for libc as well, Debian GNU/klNetBSD. Another
>    option may also be putting the k/l after the BSD. Debian GNU/NetBSDk
>    and Debian GNU/NetBSDkl.
> If you want to go that way, why don't we distinguish between userland, 
> libc and kernel in the name. Debian GNU/Linux currently means GNU 
> userland and libc with a Linux kernel. This is fine for Debian GNU/Linux 
> as we don't use other userlands or libc's with the linux kernel (AFAIK). 
> But for *BSD this becomes a problem as userland is not necessarily the 
> same as libc. I would propose the a naming standard of Debian 
> Userland/Libc/Kernel, e.g. Debian GNU/GNU/NetBSD or Debian 
> GNU/NetBSD/NetBSD. It may look a little strange, but it serves its 
> purpose. This way the name is also specific as to what the NetBSD 
> section refers to, which in a way would be a statement of fact.

My impression is that this will not satisfy The NetBSD Foundation, though
they could always suprise me. In part, their objection appears to be using
the bareword 'NetBSD' in any context other than referring to the current
software produced by the NetBSD Project, taken as a whole.

Much like we normally expect "Debian" to refer either to the project, or
to the entire system, rather than, say, just dpkg and apt.
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>                                        ,''`.
Debian GNU/NetBSD(i386) porter                                       : :' :
                                                                     `. `'

Attachment: pgpuLhUfw5EJk.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: