Momchil Velikov wrote:
"Erik" == Erik Steffl <steffl@bigfoot.com> writes:Erik> Momchil Velikov wrote:"Erik" == Erik Steffl <steffl@bigfoot.com> writes:Erik> I know that ms doesn't distribute gnu utilsFWIW, they do. GCC and GDB at least.Erik> just to clarify: at the same time, if debian is calleddebianErik> gnu/linux system because debian developers decided that it should Erik> be called that then that's it, I don't object to that.Yes. What's wrong in _convincing_ others to do the similar thing ? Just like debian were convinvced ?Erik> same thing as convincing other to be/(not)use/(not)believe/etc XXX Erik> (where XXX is personal choice). specially in a zealous way (THAT's Erik> the RIGHT path) What's this ``same thing'' ? I fail to see anything wrong in the process of convincing anybody to anything.
so you are one of the few that like the Jehova witnesses? (based on my personal experience most people don't like them coming to their doors)
Erik> I thought I already explained it - everybody should be able to name Erik> the project whatever they please, without one or another author of Erik> used software demanding anything beyond GPL (talkig about GPL-ed Erik> software). Nobody argues with this. But you seem to think that somebody's right to name something invalidates my right to attempt to influence the naming decision.
the question is whether you have a right in the first place.it is kinda same as somebody approaching you and trying to convince you to e.g. change your hairdo. not illegal (IANAL though:-) and not strictly wrong but not something that I would recommend, in general.
as I said it's completely different for debian developers - if a debian developer tries to convince other debian developers it's ok. if gnu tries to convince others to change the name it's not OK (that's what I said is annoying narcissism, not strictly wrong but even less right, IMO)
erik