Why no mention of GNU?

[J.B. Nicholson-Owens]

First, I'm glad to see that this matter is taken seriously and has resulted in
changes to their website.  I suggest removing the reference to the two
movements being indistinct and compatible because it simply is not true and
because this language doesn't really get to what I think the team is
trying to say.

Ubuntu's website includes:
(http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/philosophy/document_view)
> While some refer to free and open source as competing movements with 
> different ends, we do not see free and open source software as either 
> distinct or incompatible.

John M. Gabriele wrote:
> Hmm... I believe they are distinct movements, and I don't see how it can be
> said they're not.

They certainly are not the same.  To name a few differences:

  * they have different starting dates (the free software movement started with
the launch of the GNU Project in 1984 and the open source movement started
with the Open Source Inititative in 1998),

  * they have different philosophies (best described in
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html),

  * there were different people involved in starting the two movements,

  * there are different levels of contribution to the free software community
(the most important and popular licenses, compiler, and many other programs
were all developed under the aegis of the GNU Project, clearly an activity of
the free software movement.  Many of these programs were developed before the
OSI existed.  The OSI has merely listed those licenses among its approved
licenses, but not started any software project I'm aware of which
can compare to the work done to make GNU),

  * and different sets of licenses are given the imprimatur of the
respective organizations (FSF & OSI).  This is a direct result of the
different philosophies of the two movements.  There are incompatibilities
that result from these differences: not all works licensed under one
OSI-approved license can legally be merged with a work under a free software
license.

That's not to say the two movements are enemies.  As the aforementioned essay
indicates, members of both movements work together on some practical projects.
One of those projects is GCC, the GNU Compiler Collection, which was
initially written by RMS (then known as the GNU C Compiler) but now is
maintained by people not all of whom side with the FSF's philosophy.  And
that's okay with the FSF:

   "Some people who contribute to GCC may hold open-source views--we don't
    insist contributors must agree with the GNU Project on these questions--but
    GCC overall is part of the free software movement."

                 -- from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-07/msg00873.html,
                    a post to the GCC mailing list by RMS.

However, the belief that the two movements are not distinct is indefensible.

Therefore, I suggest changing the following text on
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/philosophy/document_view:

> Ubuntu is happy to call itself open source. While some refer to free and
> open source as competing movements with different ends, we do not see free
> and open source software as either distinct or incompatible. Ubuntu proudly
> includes members who identify with both the free software and open source
> camps and many who identify with both.

to read:

"Ubuntu GNU/Linux is happy to call itself open source. Our team proudly
includes members who identify with both the free software and open source
movements and many who identify with both movements."