I think it's fair that those who write the articles get to pick between Linux and GNU/Linux. Maybe the editors will reconsider their policy of standardizing on the short form, as long as people don't start going off-topic and arguing for GNU/Linux as standard in all articles.

Also I can't resist pointing out it's being fairly pedantic to claim that plain "Linux" is so ambiguous and easily confused with other things like Android. The common naming convention when discussing an OS is clearly "Linux" = "GNU/Linux" and "Android" = "Android/Linux". It does not result in actual confusion in practice, just like headlines about "hackers steal passwords" merely annoys me that we lost the battle of hacker vs cracker for black hats, it does not actually confuse me ;)

Quoting: SpeedsterAlso I can't resist pointing out it's being fairly pedantic to claim that plain "Linux" is so ambiguous and easily confused with other things like Android. The common naming convention when discussing an OS is clearly "Linux" = "GNU/Linux" and "Android" = "Android/Linux". It does not result in actual confusion in practice, just like headlines about "hackers steal passwords" merely annoys me that we lost the battle of hacker vs cracker for black hats, it does not actually confuse me ;)

The "Linux" name isn't ambiguous, it's the name of a Kernel project. Maybe it's because of my technical background, because I don't confuse the monitor with the computer, or the computer with the CPU. I try to call everything by its name and I don't get what's wrong about it. And, if I can respect other people's choice to call it whatever they want, why should I be treated as pedantic and my submissions edited?

First off, I agreed it would be a good thing to leave the naming according the article author, that's separate from why the author prefers GNU/Linux or not.

Like many overloaded terms, the context is almost always sufficient to make the two meanings of "Linux" clear: "Linux" the kernel and a "Linux" distribution. If you take a few moments to consider that dispassionately (trying to think of actual examples of confusion you have witnessed, and without feeling insulted [1]), you might even agree and in the future just stick with the real justification for GNU/Linux, giving more visibility to the FSF. Many (though not all) who care about Free Software rather than only Open Source will respect that, whether they change their own habits or not.

Or, maybe you will think of a bunch of non-contrived examples where plain "Linux" caused confusion between GNU/Linux and Android/Linux, so the GNU prefix ought to have been included "to differentiate it from Android" in which case I might need to retrain my own habits of speech...

[1] I admit to pedantic tendencies at times myself; picked it up from my dad in addition to his interests in programming. I recognize a pedantic argument when I see one ;) but sorry if it was rude of me to call it that.

P.S. maybe I didn't make it clear, but I don't actually consider the GNU/Linux term pedantic, just the argument that it is needed in practice to differentiate Debian GNU/Linux from Android and other projects using the Linux kernel. Also note that bothering to pick on one justification for a naming convention while admitting that there is another reasonable justification for said naming convention, might also be called, a bit pedantic ;)

Quoting: SpeedsterFirst off, I agreed it would be a good thing to leave the naming according the article author, that's separate from why the author prefers GNU/Linux or not.

Like many overloaded terms, the context is almost always sufficient to make the two meanings of "Linux" clear: "Linux" the kernel and a "Linux" distribution. If you take a few moments to consider that dispassionately (trying to think of actual examples of confusion you have witnessed, and without feeling insulted [1]), you might even agree and in the future just stick with the real justification for GNU/Linux, giving more visibility to the FSF. Many (though not all) who care about Free Software rather than only Open Source will respect that, whether they change their own habits or not.

Or, maybe you will think of a bunch of non-contrived examples where plain "Linux" caused confusion between GNU/Linux and Android/Linux, so the GNU prefix ought to have been included "to differentiate it from Android" in which case I might need to retrain my own habits of speech...

I'm a computer engineer, so it's my profession and my hobby that I'm taking seriously, I don't think I'm being passionate. In the other hand, I feel some people against my views are very passionate.

You seem to think about me as someone who tries to use the GNU word as much as possible and then makes an excuse up for it. You're wrong.

I won't extend giving you examples of confusion but I can express myself more concisely and using less words than you. Maybe not everyone will understand due to the confusion created, like when I tell someone to switch their computer on and they switch their monitor instead. In this case I would explain the difference between monitor and computer. Is that pedantic or being too passionate?

Quoting: berarmaI'm a computer engineer, so it's my profession and my hobby that I'm taking seriously, I don't think I'm being passionate. In the other hand, I feel some people against my views are very passionate.

You seem to think about me as someone who tries to use the GNU word as much as possible and then makes an excuse up for it. You're wrong.

Indeed, some people are passionate against such views, but I'm not one of them. I took you as repeating a common (and IMO weak) argument for "GNU/Linux" naming convention, and thought you might not have considered it carefully yet. Apparently I'm wrong and you really believe that argument is a strong one (though I haven't managed to follow your reasoning yet). Feel free to keep using it then, just please don't be ticked at me because my intention was never to offend you; I don't want to alienate other usefully-contributing GOL members.

Can we not argue this point over again?

If you submit an article to GOL it is down to the preference of the editor who approves it to edit it to their will to make it look nicer.

I edited it to Linux as I flat-out don't like to use "GNU/Linux" on this website, as to be frank I think it sounds crap.

Nothing to do with hating on the GNU, but everyone with half a brain knows that when talking about Linux they mean a Linux Distribution. As already pointed out so well by speedster.

berarma - If your article was directly talking about GNU and Linux stuff I would have left it in, but it was simply talking about a Humble Bundle, so I chose to keep it nice and simple to the way I like to see it.

Maybe if people weren't so pedantic and pushy about calling it GNU/Linux I would like it, but I don't.

I am closing this topic as the entire point of this topic was already solved, and I don't like naming wars to continue as they are a waste of everyone's energy. Go be productive people and live a little! :)