[Linux-aus] Should Linux Australia change its name?

[Russell Coker]

On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, James Bromberger <james at rcpt.to> wrote:
> However, after some debate we found that the established recognition of
> being a LUG out weighed a name change. We felt that many generally
> understood the association of Linux to include the Open Source
> communities. Oh, and the puns we have with naming stuff[1] was far too
> amusing; so we've stayed as PLUG.

Back when we decided on the name for LUV the general consensus for the name 
was determined by an IRL meeting.  As I recall there was one BSD user there 
who was happy for the group to be named LUV.

Even back in the 90's Linux had a better name than *BSD and it was seen as a 
PR benefit.  In the history of LUV there has never been any exclusion of other 
Unix systems.  Discussions on the mailing lists cover other free Unix systems 
and when lectures are offered I believe that they are generally accepted (we 
had one on the HURD recently).

While this is evidence that you can have a name that doesn't quite match the 
operation, I think that there are potential benefits of having a parent 
organisation that does some different things.  One example that comes to mind 
is the relationship between SPI, Debian, and other projects which use SPI 
services.

I think that SPI is doing good things and that having an organisation in 
Australia which has a similar relationship to various free 
software/hardware/culture organisations could work out well.

But I think that the Linux Australia name should be kept and continually used.

I think that someone who is casually involved in Linux shouldn't need to know 
that there is any change.  Linux should still be promoted in Australia under 
the name "Linux Australia".

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/