Talk:GNU

In The GNU Project (http://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject) Stallman gives a longer and more complete (and partisan) account of the project and its history.

I have removed "partisan", as I cannot agree with it. As the founder and the leader of the GNU Project, Richard Stallman is most qualified to give the world an account of how it came to be. Moreover, I am not aware of anyone within the Project who finds that his account misrepresents facts.

I agree that:

1. Stallman's account is opinionated, as everything he writes and says is.
2. The GNU Project's take on Free Software may be seen as "partisan" by Open Source advocates, but that does not affect the accuracy or the validity of the account (in other words, the Project may be partisan, but this history is not).

---

FWIW (not to take a position on the above exchange, but supply a general principle), as people never tire of pointing out on the neutral point of view page, it is entirely possible to be fact-stating while being quite partisan. It seems to me that the recent edit-ors of the GNU page could stand to have a gander at neutral point of view. If you disagree with how something is presented (and a significant, well-informed number of people agree with you), then the way to proceed is to "go meta," by explicitly stating what the different competing views are. We will brook no "official views" here on Wikipedia. --LMS

---

As the guy who added "partisan", I'll humbly submit "personal" instead. I agree that "partisan" is a loaded term. Even though I personally like partisanship, people these days use it as a synonym for chauvinism. --The Cunctator

I find "personal" just right. Thank you for the cooperative attitude.

--- Can anyone add any facts concerning Stallman's strong arm tactics intended to coerce open source developers to license under GNU?

I think it's more like Tux Boy trying to coerce RMS to change the GPL. (This is a partisan remark) Ed Poor

---

CVS is not a GNU project! It is very specifically listed on the gnu.org site under "other GPL-licensed projects", not among GNU projects. GNU projects, for example, generally have their copyright explicitly transferred to the FSF, while the CVS copyright is still retained by its original authors (and then licensed under the GPL). The gnu.org site also happens to host their mailing list, but that doesn't make then a GNU project either. --Lee Daniel Crocker

---

The Free Software Directory [1] (http://www.gnu.org/directory/cvs) notes: This is a GNU package. Also, GNU maintains a CVS page [2] (http://www.gnu.org/software/cvs/cvs), and gnu.org/software/xxx pages only exist for GNU packages. RCS, on which CVS is based, in also listed as a GNU program.

It is true that some GNU programs have their copyrights held by the FSF, but many others aren't. As I understand it, GNU packages are written and distributed under the auspices of the GNU project, and copyright assignment is an orthogonal issue. (As an irrelevant aside, some of the source files in the CVS sources are indeed assigned to the FSF, as you may verify.)

Still, since the GNU website seems to contradict itself on the matter and it's a very minor part of the article, it might be better to leave it out. Unless, of course, someone wants to go and dig into the history of CVS, which might be an interesting exercise.

--CYD

It is somewhat contradictory, and I might also mention that even though there is a gnu.org page for it, the source is in directory "/non-gnu/cvs/". In my mind, at least, I think of "GNU projects" as those that were /originated/ by the FSF, or those that were explicitly taken over by them, and primarily developed by FSF members, not merely projects from independent developers that happen to work closely with the FSF folks (like CVS).

---

I think the whole Gnu (wildebeast) \ GNU (project) thing is a little confusing, particularly with the one-liner Gnu pointer at the head of the whole article. Why not make a Gnu page for the animal (with a line below that says, "Oh, and if you were looking for the GNU project ...) and a GNU page (with a line below which point you to Gnu)? I think it'd look much better than the present set-up, but I thought I'd ask you guy before I got out my clipping shears :) -- Gaurav

I agree. But please don't distinguish only by lower and uppercase letters. Please use "Gnu (wildebeast)" and "GNU (project)" -- Nils