DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3) [LWN.net]

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 11, 2011 20:15 UTC (Mon) by manishsinha (guest, #61915) [Link] (2 responses)

So a person cannot take the name "Ubuntu" without writing 10 lines about it's udnerpinnings and ideology and the various components it is made up of.

This post is about Artists and designing pro creative apps. As Jason told, you can brag all about your GNU and Linux philosophy. It hardly works on artists. This post isnt about telling Ubuntu has GNOME, Linux kernel, GNU and 200 other technologies as the base.

Now can you discuss what this post is about?

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 15:31 UTC (Tue) by mattdm (subscriber, #18) [Link] (1 responses)

> So a person cannot take the name "Ubuntu" without writing 10 lines about it's udnerpinnings and ideology and the various components it is made up of.

You are absolutely missing my point. I don't mean that at all.

This isn't about underpinnings. It's about the Unix wars all over again. It's a great companion piece to today's article where Google says "Android is the Linux desktop dream come true".

In short, no it is not. Rather than having a whole ecosystem with many different parts filling different niches but in general part of the same thing, we have segmentation and fragmentation. That's not good.

pr0 cr34tive appz, sure

Posted Jul 22, 2011 8:39 UTC (Fri) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]

They don't even try to get the point, it seems. :(

Personally, "for ubuntu" rather reads like "for clueless by clueless".

But that's just the sort of crap that follows the trend of spoonfeeding the crowd and not educating the conscious people -- which Shuttleworth is trotting along with Ballmer (and to some extent Jobs but that's a bit, well, different). Saw this in sounder@ubuntu back in 2005, and there was no change to any better in this regard.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 11, 2011 21:24 UTC (Mon) by smadu2 (guest, #54943) [Link] (19 responses)

OT, but may be the community at large can convince ubuntu.com and android.com folks to put GNU/Linux somewhere on their respective homepages.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 11, 2011 21:46 UTC (Mon) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link] (18 responses)

Just FYI -- Android is just Linux, not GNU/Linux, because the only GNU component Android uses is GCC.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 6:23 UTC (Tue) by tdwebste (guest, #18154) [Link] (17 responses)

pizza, I assume you met to say gcc and kernel.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 6:58 UTC (Tue) by viro (subscriber, #7872) [Link] (16 responses)

Excuse me? The kernel in Android is Linux, which is *NOT* GNU anything, TYVM... They (both Android crowd and GNU one) are allowed to use it, but that's it. Credit where credit is due, and GNU project has earned none whatsoever as far as kernel is concerned.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 8:15 UTC (Tue) by k3ninho (subscriber, #50375) [Link] (15 responses)

I think we have a poster confused by the GNU-as-in-FSF and the GNU-as-in-GPL-licence. The latter one is a rare rendering of 'GNU', but it's worth noting.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 14:41 UTC (Tue) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (13 responses)

So it's supposed to be »GNU/Linux« the way most other free-software projects are called »MIT/X11«, »Apache Foundation/Apache«, »UCB/FreeBSD«, »LaTeX Project/LaTeX« and so on? A »rare rendering«, indeed

Also note that the GNU project itself consists of packages using a variety of licenses including not only the GPL and LGPL, but also MIT, BSD, and others. IMHO, equating »GNU« with the GPL is, to say the least, misleading.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 18:34 UTC (Tue) by tdwebste (guest, #18154) [Link] (12 responses)

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html

The GNU project recommends GPL and can use only software with licenses compatible with GPL

Yes there are many non-GPL licenses compatible with GPL which allows them to be part of the GNU project.

The original BSD is not compatible with GNU GPL is NOT part of the GNU project. However FreeBSD, modified BSD, MIT /X11 are compatible.

Linux is part of the GPU project.
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html

On the other hand GNU software projects are only GNU GPL, AGPL, LGPL, FDL.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 18:47 UTC (Tue) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (4 responses)

STallman can claim that the linux kernel is part of the GNU project, but since the people writing the linux kernel don't agree, and especially since they refuse to comply with the Stallman's 'requirements', it's hard to take the claim seriously (other than taking it as a case of someone trying to appropriate other people's work and claim it as their own)

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 13, 2011 16:25 UTC (Wed) by tuna (guest, #44480) [Link] (3 responses)

What is "the linux kernel". I thought Linux is an operating system kernel. Is "the linux kernel" some kind of microkernel?

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 14, 2011 2:03 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] (2 responses)

At least dlang didn't call it "the kernel Linux" like Stallman advocates.

(you can still see examples on gnu.org, it's downright weird)

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 14, 2011 5:11 UTC (Thu) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (1 responses)

I called it the Linux kernel to differentiate it from the Linux Operating System family of distributions.

I am explicitly not agreeing with Stallman's views on GNU/Linux. please don't imply that I at all agree with him on that.

David Lang

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 14, 2011 14:27 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Confusing joke, my bad. I only meant to poke fun at those who are never happy with what the kernel is called.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 20:32 UTC (Tue) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (3 responses)

I see no claims on that page that Linux is part of the GNU project. I do see claims that Linux is viewed as part of a whole "GNU system".

In Stallman's mind anything that is free software and can be used as a component to build his dream of a free system built along the GNU Project goals can be part of a constructed "GNU system" that fulfills this dream. This claim is somewhat independent from the idea that the GNU Project provided tools are the important part of this system, although that is implied in this text.

This is not to claim that those other parts which can be combined into a "GNU system" are part of the GNU Project. He would never claim that, because those other untouchables do not conform to the ideologitecture.

There is no shrinking for overclaiming at times, such as the whole idea of GNU/Linux, but specifically to claim that Linux is a GNU Project work is a claim I do not expect to ever see.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 21:09 UTC (Tue) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (2 responses)

In particular, RMS is as free to incorporate the Linux kernel into his GNU system as the folks at Google are free to incorporate the Linux kernel into their Android system. It's free software, after all.

There is certainly no obligation on Google's part to acknowledge the fact that Linux a project largely unrelated to the GNU project is also useful for the GNU system, when they themselves don't put anything from the GNU project into their own offering. RMS may have half a leg to stand on when he insists on the name »GNU/Linux« for the case, frequently seen on servers and desktop PCs, of a Linux kernel with GNU tools (among other things), but in the case of Android, no GNU tools on the system, hence no »GNU/« prefix. End of story.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 23:54 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] (1 responses)

I think that one reasonable way to settle the language wars here is to call glibc/eglibc-based systems with a Linux kernel GNU/Linux, but not to use the term "GNU" for embedded systems or devices that lack GNU libraries or userland. That way credit is given only where deserved. This is a distinction that also makes sense for developers, since applications generally interface with the C library and not (directly) with the kernel. So Ubuntu would be a GNU/Linux system while Android would not be.

(And eglibc is to glibc as egcs was to gcc, still owned by the FSF, forked for more efficient development practices).

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 13, 2011 0:12 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

first off, before you go there, justify why glibc is so much more important than gnome/kde/xorg/etc

secondly, the fact that a program forks away from the FSF lead project would indicate to me that it should no longer be considered 'owned' by the FSF, even if later on the FSF abandons it's 'trunk' and accepts the fork as a replacement.

there's no need to fork a project to get more efficient development practices if you are the ones doing the leading/management of the project, that step is only needed if you need to get out from under the management of the project.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 22:57 UTC (Tue) by viro (subscriber, #7872) [Link] (2 responses)

Linux is *used* by GNU project. They have a right to do so. What they do not have is any kind of right to demand that other projects using the same thing would promote GNU/FSF/Stallman's religion/whatnot.

Mind you, I'm less than fond of their demands of that kind directed at anybody, but in case mentioned upthread (i.e. Android) it's really over the top. Toolchain is not enough to describe something as GNU system (according to RMS et.al.) and the kernel is *not* something GNU has a claim upon.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 13, 2011 0:08 UTC (Wed) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (1 responses)

> What they do not have is any kind of right to demand that other projects using the same thing would promote GNU/FSF/Stallman's religion/whatnot.

Sure they do. Just like you have the right to demand that they stop. What they lack is the right to enforce their demand, just like you do.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 15, 2011 22:27 UTC (Fri) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link]

These claims are not similar in some ways. Viro's claim is based on truth, and the RMS suggestion is based on distortion.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 18:40 UTC (Tue) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Rare rendering?? Saying "GNU" when one means "GPL" is simply a mistake.

DeRose: Designing pro creative apps (Part 1-3)

Posted Jul 12, 2011 0:16 UTC (Tue) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link]

That IMO is far better than the reverse, articles about "Linux" that just /assume/ that all Linux is Ubuntu (or alternatively, RPM-binary-package based, or all Gnome or KDE, or...).

At least if the headline or first paragraph says Ubuntu, I know I can reasonably safely skip it. If it says Linux and looks interesting, only to find out a third or a half the way thru that it's simply /assuming/ all Linux is Ubuntu... THAT'S what gets me!

Duncan