|
From: | Windigo |
Subject: | Re: [Social-discuss] "GNU social" sucks. |
Date: | Mon, 12 Jan 2015 09:49:54 -0800 |
User-agent: | Roundcube Webmail/1.0.2 |
On 2015-01-11 3:59 am, Mikael Nordfeldth wrote:
2015-01-11 11:10 skrev Adam Moore:But the name sucks.You're welcome to use the software, apply patches which relabel it to front-end users and start attracting sheeple to your GNU herd or whatever ;) The freedom of free software, isn't it awesome? Honestly, I doubt developers hesitate to patch things because of the project's name. I agree end users might care what their service is called. But then again, we have _many_ users who don't use "GNU social" but use "Quitter" instead (still fully interoperable). Of the many "Quitter" themed sites, the https://quitter.se/ logo isn't even a GNU (as with the qvitter GNU social plugin they're developing[1]) but two chillin' out maxin' birds instead. But thanks for the enthusiastic suggestion. :) [1] http://github.com/hannesmannerheim/qvitter
While I agree that the GNUsocial "brand" might have some issues (anyone present in the IRC channel has seen some confused chatters looking to shoot the breeze), I don't think GNU herds would help address most of the symptoms you've brought up. In fact, I feel like attaching "GNU" to any project generally confuses the non-technically minded.
I do love the idea of experimenting on an instance. Technically, we could change all of the terminology and branding per-instance without causing any administrative overhead at the project level. On FragDev, we're currently still using the basic StatusNet layout, but I'd be willing to give something else a try if our users were interested.
Thanks for starting up such an interesting discussion! - Windigo
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |