On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:22:36PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> The discussion on what Debian is (Debian Linux, Debian GNU/Linux,
> Debian OS, etc) comes back from time to time, but imho it is
> irrelevant here
Note that recently the -www team has started uniforming things on that
front, at least for what concerns our web presence. Given that "Debian
GNU/Linux" is not necessarily correct anymore (we have several kernels…,
the choice, AFAIU, is to use solely "Debian" when details don't matter,
and to list flavors (Debian GNU/Linux, GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/Hurd) when they
do. Which totally makes sense.
> since those all refer to the product not the "institution" we should
> associate ourselves with. www.debian.org refers to the "Debian
> project" while talking about Debian as an institution, and seems to be
> more appropriate. Or ... ?
I think that to refer to Debian as an institution, we should
consistently use "Debian Project". We do that in legal-ish contexts
("signed/represented by foo, on behalf of the Debian Project"). I think
we --- actually, you :-) --- should do the same for scientific
publications.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature