Talk:GNU Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓
This page is listed on the bounty board

Marudubshinki has pledged to make a donation of $10 USD to the Wikimedia Foundation when this page is improved to featured article status.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the GNU Project article.
Article policies
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Free software Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Free Software, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve free software-related articles.
B rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
High rated as High-importance on the assessment scale
This article is part of the Linux WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Linux, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Second paragraph

I'm about to revert the second paragraph for the second time. An anonymous contributor 151.203.49.181 has been changing the second paragraph to say that the GNU project "unable to create a quality kernel useful for the masses", although this is true, it is also true that the GNU project cannot fly. The reason these two facts don't deserve a mention in the second paragraph are that neither was the goal of the GNU project. The goal was to make a free software operating system exist. By circumstance, this required writing a c compiler, and a standard c library, and a debugger, but, also by circumstance, it did not involve writing a kernel, or being able to fly.

My first revert of the anon's changes was referred to as "vandalism" in the anon's second edit summary, so I've explained myself here. Gronky 21:07, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you read the definition for "Operating System" -- if it helps, here's a quote:
That is, the common understanding includes not only the low-level "kernel"[...]
Combine this with a quote from GNU:
The goal was to bring a wholly free software operating system into existence.
I'm not sure what to make of your "it cannot fly" comment, other than you want to confuse the issue further with a defensive remark.
Since you seem to have a personal vested intrest in maintaining this, and I have better things to do than smack around a geek with an agenda, I'll leave this to you to fix.
--Anon.
Ah yes, I think I see your confusion now, and the answer is actually in the quote that you have included in your comment. I think you think GNU's goal was to write an operating system, but this is not the case. GNU's goal was to bring one into existence. This doesn't mean writing every part yourself. Most of the time this meant writing new software, but sometimes it only required integrating existing software (such as the X Window System, the Tex typesetting system, and the Linux kernel). Gronky 22:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Just because the work on Hurd has been slow and buggy doesn't mean the effort isn't underway. If it isn't the intention of GNU/FSF to create their own kernel, why does development of Hurd continue after all these years?

-.Probably 90% of all opensource projects are either in direct competition with another project, have no obvious use given other free software available, or are too ambitious to ever be finished; but this doesn't stop people working on them, 'for fun'. Hurd falls into the last catagory. Hurd aims to improve on unix-like kernels, by using a 'micro kernel', with drivers being written seperatly, and sitting in an abstraction layer above this, allowing for easier driver development and deployment, though the glacial pace of development means that it may well be a very long time before it is completed. 213.120.94.110 14:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge into GNU

I think this should be merged into GNU. This article doesn't have enough info on the technical side, and GNU is a bit thin on the politics (though to a lesser degree); with the FSF these two issues are inextricably linked. Superm401 - Talk 02:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I added a section in Talk:GNU pointing the discussion here. The templates encourage discussion in both places, which is disjoint and not helpful. Lentower 19:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
It's better for discussion to happen on the Talk page of the merge target - that way the discussion and outcome will still be visible after the merge. Gronky 13:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

No Merge There is much discussion on Talk:GNU on why the articles should be separate. It is a very wise idea to review both Talk pages before adding the merge templates. Merges have often been proposed in the past.

This article GNU Project and GNU are both candidates for the 2006 WP CD. Be good to have the CD and Web versions the same here. See the box at the top of this Talk:GNU_Project page and the the box at the top of the Talk:GNU page.

Leave them separate. They are distinct topics. Beef both up. Lentower 19:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

weak support for merge -- What is the difference? One is the OS and the other one is the project to develop it. Do I get it right? So why not talk about project in GNU page since GNU Project doesn't have much material anyway... -- AdrianTM 19:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
The amount of the material is not relevant. Both topics are notable, and stand by themselves. Lentower 20:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No merge - the operating system is just one milestone in the GNU project. Gronky 13:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Staff_and_employees_of_the_Free_Software_Foundation

See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Staff_and_employees_of_the_Free_Software_Foundation.

This new article started as a section in the FSF article, and was split off with no rationale, discussion, or consensus by User:Chealer (talk|contribs) .

The editors of this GNU article could have good points to make on this AfD. Lentower 19:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project goal and activity

The way the article is currently written, it is not clear to me if the GNU project is still active. The original goal is achieved. If the project is active, what are the goals today? Is the "GNU Project" really a project, in the usual sense? --HelgeStenstrom 12:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a good point. The answer is that the GNU project is an open-ended project to bring into existence a sufficient body of free software such that people will be able to use computers for their tasks without having to use proprietary software. The first major milestone was to make an operating system exist, and that milestone has been reached. I will try to find time to update the page, but I hope others can too/instead. Gronky 13:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] implementation quirk

This may be sorta outside the scope of the "GNU Project" discussion, and more a matter for the overall wikipedia folks. Or the wiki folks, or the "double braces" folks. I am not sure. Just my 0.02. This comment relates to the rendering, by my browser, of the little rectangle-enclosed link to a "PORTAL" about "Free Software" in general:

Image:Floss draft.png Free software Portal



It seems to correspond to [be implemented by] a little snip of code that says: {{portalpar|Free software|Floss draft.png}}

My browser is Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.11. My comment is that, unless I use "Ctrl Minus" to lower the font sizes to be so microscopic that they are hard to read, some of the characters (e.g., the characters of the left-side phrase ,which I think is supposed to say "Portal: Free Software"), do not show up. (and then, as for the stuff that is supposed to go on the Right-Hand Side - that does show up correctly - and it says, admittedly sorta redundantly, "Free Software Portal"); There seems to be some kind of overlapping phenomenon going on, that I do not understand. I don't know a lot about this stuff. In this case I suspect that it might be mainly a matter of how this wiki, implements some of the "double braces" stuff, like the snip shown above. I am not saying that this is a big deal, just that someone might want to look in to it. It might even be due to something that is occurring on my end, - if so you can let me know (reply here, I guess). Thanks for listening, Mike Schwartz 03:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What is 'FSF"

Search in the body of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.59.108.89 (talk) 13:56, August 30, 2007 (UTC)