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

Russell Coker russell at coker.com.au
Mon Apr 23 02:51:36 EST 2012

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 

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/

More information about the linux-aus mailing list