Recent searches
Search options
the graphics app with the inappropriate name just had its 3.0 release and didn't use that as an opportunity to change its name
disappointing
@chrisjrn and it's such an easy fix. Just omit the Gnu.
@glyph @onelson @chrisjrn @Br3nda I don’t really see the benefit to associating yourself so closely with a parent project like that for desktop applications, especially ones that are largely cross platform and probably more widely used on proprietary platforms.
It seems the few people in charge of the editor are not interested in changing the name, so the community should. If even just Ubuntu and Fedora packaging teams renamed it that would be huge.
@mattl @onelson @chrisjrn @Br3nda I chimed in a little bit on the thread just to hopefully get them a sense of the community sentiment, but overall, my feeling is that this is just so sad, and such a pointless display of stubbornness. There are clearly a LOT of people who do not like the name, and it's overshadowing such a tremendous volunteer achievement. Just so much pointless arguing over something that is the least interesting part of the software.
@mattl @onelson @chrisjrn @Br3nda I have heard from more than one disabled person that they either don't mind or slightly like the name, so my level of energy for considering this a worthwhile moral crusade is relatively low, but the *project*'s position makes zero sense to me. "we feel that in the long run, sterilization of language will do more harm than good"? wtf? A complete non-sequitur, nothing whatsoever is explained by their FAQ.
@chrisjrn gah.. i thought they picked the new name ages ago...
@Br3nda @chrisjrn There was another group of people who created a fork with a different name (Glimpse). None of the main project developers jumped ship, and they didn't attract many new developers. Other than rebranding, they didn't get much done before winding down.
If the project is going to get a new name, it probably has to come from within. And that might mean it never happens.
@Br3nda @chrisjrn I'm not certain, since a lot of the project infrastructure is offline now. But I suspect they overestimated the work involved. It's a large code base to maintain, and I don't think any of them had much experience as contributors before hand.
And I agree that it was a good name: it's close to the original name, and thematically appropriate for an image editor.
@chrisjrn I found a reasoning for why they plan to never change the name and it's the most privileged stance I've ever seen.
"We use it in an empowering way" is the summary.
@pathunstrom they are certainly empowering themselves to use it