Re: [GNU-linux-libre] In search of FSDG certification

[Ivan Zaigralin]

Thanks, stressware! This is indeed our take on it.

While this is totally irrelevant to  the matter at hand, here's a fun
piece of trivia: Slack actually refers back to the gift of "Bob", not
Slackware :)

At any rate, we have a feeling these names are just different enough:
they make very different aural impressions, and "Slack" is in a
different part of the word. The case against "Slack" (if there's one)
would seem to be weaker than the case against something like
"Blackware", "Slacksoft", or "Bobware", which also share half a word
with "Slackware", but sound, spell, and mean very similar.

On 03/02/2016 03:11 AM, address@hidden wrote:
> 
>> I think the name "FreeSlack" may be in conflict with the FSDG:
>> "We will not list a distribution whose name makes confusion with
>> nonfree distributions likely. For example, if Foobar Light is a free
>> distribution and Foobar is a nonfree distribution, we will not list
>> Foobar Light. This is because we expect that the distinction between
>> the two would be lost in the process of communicating the message.
>>
>> In particular, the principal name of the free distribution
>> (“Foobar”, in this example) should not be part of the name of any
>> nonfree distribution."
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Henry
> 
> That seems to just refer to confusion, not mere reference. It is
> likely that people will think that 'FreeSlack' is derived from
> Slackware, as it is, but I doubt whether many will confuse it for
> Slackware. Only part of the name of the Free distribution (FreeSlack)
> is part of the name of a non-Free distribution.
> 
>

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature