Talk:GNU Project

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: The amount of the material is not relevant.  Both topics are notable, and stand by themselves.  Lentower 20:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge into GNU

message: 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)
thread_title: See [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Staff_and_employees_of_the_Free_Software_Foundation]]

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Project goal and activity 

message: Is the GNU image an official logo of the GNU project? If so, is there any reason it doesn't appear in the article (other than hidden inside a collapsible template at the bottom?) —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 06:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo 

message: I just read that "bazaar" became part of the GNU-Project but without being published under the GPL.  I was suprized, because I thought that the GPL is what makes Software "GNU-Software".  I consulted this Wikipedia-Page but didn't find my question clearly answered.  Perhaps, a paragraph answering it should be added. -- 91.3.70.6
91.3.70.6 (talk) 23:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes software part of the GNU Project is the Project (i.e., Stallman) and the developers saying so.  Canonical says that happened, and there's no particular reason to doubt them.  Anyway, Bazaar has been under the GPL for a long time, possibly from its start.  RossPatterson (talk) 03:45, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What makes a software project part of the GNU-Project? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:06, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:FSF-Logo.svg Nominated for Deletion

message: Hello, I'm very new to editing for Wikipedia, and want to record this page. Any tips, advice, words of caution?
EDIT: I'm only going to make a recording once I get feedback to make sure my recording is accurate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan 9001 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want to record this article 

message: GNU has also played a big role in setting an example for other projects.
The Qt toolkit being released as free software was clearly due to pressure from GNU.  FreeBSD was also influenced, according to Keith Bostic:
"I think it's highly unlikely that we ever would have gone as strongly as we did without the GNU influence," says Bostic, looking back. "It was clearly something where they were pushing hard and we liked the idea." 
* http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch09.html
Not yet sure how and where to mention this, but I wanted to note it here. Gronky (talk) 23:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence on FreeBSD 

message: Two things:
# As promised in my edit summary, here is a slightly-longer rationale for my having changed "software development" to "software users" in this sentence: "In the GNU Manifesto, Stallman listed four freedoms essential to software users … " The text of the manifesto does use the term software "development", but only peripherally. (It doesn't use "developers" at all; it talks about "programmers".) Beyond seemingly-superficial word choice, though, it doesn't claim that "freedoms [are] essential to software" development: if they were truly "essential", there would be no need for a manifesto. In fact, the manifesto discusses some potential difficulties these freedoms may pose for software "development" (e.g. in respect to money). In contrast, the manifesto summarizes its own raison d'être thus:  "I consider that the Golden Rule requires that if I like a program I must share it with other people who like it."It's important not to phrase this imprecisely because the focus on philosophical/ethical arguments rather than pragmatic ones is one of the key distinctions between the "Free Software" and "Open Source" camps. (I might also point to the lack of distinction between "users" and "developers" in GNU land.)Note: I realize this is not a strongly-defended argument in WP:NOR/WP:PRIMARY, especially since I don't have ready access to the (print) book cited (without a page number) as the source. If someone has an argument for "development", feel free to revert and discuss. However, I think the weight of the sources that exist would come out against "developers", which I think is ground for changing a Wikipedian-written word that I've probably already spent too much time talking about.
# Upon coming to the Talk page, I saw the note below. I'm a native English speaker, and I didn't understand the sentence either; it made me stop in confusion when I read the article. Since no one has explained in over a year, I'll remove that now, as well.
LiberalArtist (talk) 20:06, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea. Google and similar methods resulted in no hits, so I think the source is the only thing that might explain what it supposed to describe. Belorn (talk) 08:19, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

text: I will check the local library if I can get ahold of the source. Ali Polatel 19:43, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  GNU Manifesto 

message: GNUe is not a high priority project for GNU, just a GNU package which is currently not maintained. I suggest to change the redirected page to List_of_GNU_packages#Business_applications. genium ⟨✉⟩ 08:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  GNU Enterprise 

message: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
By citing the name Linux as erroneous you are bringing controversy into this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.180.46.247 (talk) 05:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Erroneously called Linux?" 

message: It feels kinda strange to me that a sentence "Combined with the operating system utilities already developed by the GNU project, it allowed for the first operating system that was free software, commonly known as Linux" has two footnotes and both actually refer to the operating system as "GNU/Linux" (with the kernel FAQ one even explicitely stating that Linux is a kernel, while GNU/Linux is a OS)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.254.1.82 (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  GNU/Linux 

message: None of the recent history between Free Software Foundation and GNU is mentioned in this article.  Why not?  Erxnmedia (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent history GNU vs FSF 

message: It's just an honor for the GNU Project, not a direct relevant part of it. Alternative to removal: move to Recognition. Thoughts? In particular, @Daveout? Amyipdev (talk) 02:15, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: i don't mind if it gets removed. it's basically trivia.  –Daveout(talk) 02:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consider removing 9965 GNU reference 

message: https://web.archive.org/web/20240518205540/https://www.gnu.org/education/edu-cases-italy-south-tyrol.html
shows information about
"All Italian-Language Schools in South Tyrol Migrated to Free Software"
and
"Every line of code developed as part of the FUSS Project is distributed under a GPLv3 or AGPLv3 license, and all documentation is available under a CC BY-SA license."
but
https://web.archive.org/web/20240522193437/https://iso.fuss.bz.it/fuss12/client/fuss-12-amd64-live-education-20240330.iso
or
https://iso.fuss.bz.it/fuss12/client/fuss-12-amd64-live-education-20240330.iso
as I can not get the archive.org one,
has a non-free firmware code folder in it.
Does this mean GNU is now accepting non-free/proprietary firmware in microcode or is this folder just named non-free-firmware, or was this just a text about schools in South Tyrol using mostly but not completely  libre software?
You can get these files with the program wget or with a browser.
The folder is at /pool/non-free-firmware/
in the iso image.
You can see it in the ios file with a program like Engrampa.
Other Cody (talk) 21:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a new GNU firmware policy?