Template talk:Linux

Not useful

This template barely links to one tenth of the Linux related subjects, and half the ones it links to doesn't even display the template. I think we should stick to the many categories about Linux that we're already using. Elfguy 23:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

sofixit. Alphax ^τεχ 16:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Just re-did it

With a nifty little navbar to boot, too. Feel free to go nuts with it. --Toussaint 17:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

This seems to have increased template clutter and it looks pretty bad on Linux. I suggest dropping this infobox-style layout and turning this back into a standard navigation box. Prolog 19:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion: leave people out

The (maybe badly named) {{FOSS celeb}} template already contains the people who made GNU/Linux happen, so rather than expanding this template to also cover this topic, I think it would be best to leave the people in the people template. Gronky 19:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

+1 The list of people is highly subjective Moreati (talk) 23:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to +1 this, it really is begging for people to throw their own personal heros in without reference to their actual impact on the Free and Open

Source Software landscape. Purserj (talk) 23:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Just against it - certain individuals are infolved in Linux kernel which only this template is related to the most.--Kozuch (talk) 15:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should stay - the lists are not the same and generally do not appear on the same pages. There is value as it is. - Ahunt (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Optional logo?

Is this being used? We should probably just hard-code a Tux in here or something. Chris Cunningham 13:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

new tux

what is wrong with the new tux?--Tuxthepenguin933 (talk) 23:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Devices

Added "Devices" to the Applications. As Devices and Embedded are pretty close, I will suggest merging those two articles into one.--Kozuch (talk) 00:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Legal bodies

What about adding kind of section that will reflect the actuall "real" (business/nonprofit) world Linux support? I know the name "Legal bodies" might not be perfect, but there is nothing better comming on my mind now.

Candidates to include:

• Linux Foundation - general Linux legal representation)
• Open Handset Alliance - developing the Linux Android (mobile phone platform)
• LiMo Foundation - mobile Linux platform

--Kozuch (talk) 08:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Added Linux Foundation as its role is quite clear.--Kozuch (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

This box

I'd just like to suggest this box be changed from a giant column in the top of articles, to a bar at the bottom, similar to the template for Unix-like operating systems, and the OpenBSD template. The way it is now looks rather intrusive. 74.13.52.11 (talk) 21:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that is an excellent idea! Many articles on Wikipedia use article-bottom, collapsible nav boxes and they are much more flexible, expandable and less obtrusive than the side-bar type of box. For an example of many (maybe too many) have a look at the bottom of the article Beechcraft Model 18. There are ten different ones there with a huge amount of information, but the point is that they don't take up much room and being at the bottom of the article are unobtrusive to the casual reader. Incidentally if an article has just one box then the box stays "open". If there are more than one they are default "closed", to reduce space.

However, rather than just endorse the idea and let someone else do the work I have made a sandbox version of what the current box in this format would look like, for everyone's consideration. You can find it at User:Ahunt/Sandbox.

I would appreciate it if editors interested in this template page could have a look and see what they think. Comments, critiques and edits of that page are welcome. Please post your comments here, rather than on my sandbox talk page, just to keep the discussion in one place where others will find it.

Incidentally in this new proposed format there would be lots of room for a "people" section similar to the OpenBSD template - Ahunt (talk) 13:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• Looks neat. Using the greens from the current template (#aaddbb and #ccffcc) may improve it further, as should removing the colons from the groupnames (unnecessary), sticking to a single font-size (I've just amended that in the current template) and using the more discreet version of the dividers alongside improved linewrap handling (i.e. {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}}). Alternatively, what if the current infobox-style template were thinner? Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the input and for disabling the categories - probably a good idea in the sandbox. I based this proposed box on the Template:OpenBSD, so it started with most of that one's features. I have made some of the changes you have suggested: removing the category colons and removing the text sizing (the template seems to automatically make bracketed text smaller). The rest of the features you mentioned are standard for this type of navigation box, including the blue colour. I haven't come across a nav box of this type that isn't blue, but perhaps I haven't looked far enough afield. See: Template:GNU, Template:OpenBSD, Template:History of Windows, Template:Mac_OS or Template:Sun_Microsystems for some examples from the software world. I have added in the image of Tux, since GNU has an image on that template and also a couple of "people" in a new category to show how that would look in the proposed User:Ahunt/Sandbox. - Ahunt (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Are there any rules of style in the various random rules most people would rather never read? I've never read any of them, so I wouldn't know. While I don't much care for green, I don't think I've ever encountered anything saying those must be blue. I know the infoxes, like the infobox software, os, and biography all that jazz, have a colour for each catagory they are in. 74.13.41.127 (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Good question - the rundown on the nav box template is at Template:Navbox. As described is possible to change the colours by applying styles. However it says "It is not recommended that one modifies the default styles but it is possible if one wishes to do so." and "Styles are generally not recommended as to maintain consistency among templates and pages in Wikipedia. However, the option to modify styles is given." - Ahunt (talk) 19:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

At this point we haven't come to a consensus either way to keep the current template or to move to one more like the proposed template. I have also invited anyone to edit the proposed template, if they want to try new colours or other features. I would like to hear from other editors watching this page on this issue. Do we keep the current one, change to the new template or modify either the current or proposed template? - 11:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy to make this a normal navbox. I don't like the "random sidebar" style of template for a number of reasons. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

In seeking a consensus one way or the other, after a week we have two in favour of moving to a more conventional nav box such as prototyped at User:Ahunt/Sandbox (me and Chris Cunningham (not at work)) and two with suggestions or questions but not opposed as far as I read (Sardanaphalus and 74.13.41.127). Is there anyone opposed to this proposal? - Ahunt (talk) 11:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• So long as they're not too wide, I don't think I have a problem with sidebar/infobox-style templates. Maybe it's time, however, to "be bold", make the change and see if that prompts any new comment..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 18:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  PS I'd replace the dividers between items in your sandbox version with more discreet wrap-sensitive ones within some linewrap handling, i.e. use {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}}.

Sardanaphalus - Thanks for your comment and encouragement on this proposal! I have edited the proposed template at User:Ahunt/Sandbox to incorporate the {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}} as you have suggested. I hope that I did it right? It seems to look okay! Can I have you check it for me? - Ahunt (talk) 21:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Only major misunderstanding seemed to be the {{·w}}s; for the spacing and linewrapping to work correctly, these need to be appended to items rather than prefixed (or spaced apart). Sardanaphalus (talk) 22:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing that. I am very new at nav boxes, but at last I have a good example now! So I gather to post it on this template page it can be copied directly with just the <pre></pre> removed?

You may also want to have a look at Template:OpenBSD I used it as an example and it seems to need some fix-ups, based on your input here? - Ahunt (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Done. (I used <div>s as an alternative to line-height; see what you think.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay - since I have some time this morning I am going to go ahead and implement the new version of the template. The order of work will be:

1. Copy code from sandbox to this template
2. Follow "What links here" to fix template locations on all pages that use the template - mostly to move it from the top of the page to the bottom.
3. Check all pages listed on the template to ensure they have the template installed - some don't right now as they aren't on the "What links here" list.
4. Add in any other pages linked to the template that need to be added.

That should do it. I will drop a note here when the work is all done. It should take around an hour, hopefully. - Ahunt (talk) 12:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay I think that I have completed everything listed above. I have checked every page the template appears on and it seems to be working right, even collapsing when there is more than one template on the page.

I know that there is at least one editor all set to jump in and improve this further, so thank you for your patience and please "have at 'er" - Ahunt (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Rocking! Many thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Chris: Glad you like the result!! This was only my second attempt at a template so it was a real learning experience. It seems to be working well so far. I am hoping that other editors will now use this new format box and expand it to include links to more Linux articles that would have over-volumed the old style box. Personally I am going to use it as an example for future templates. - Ahunt (talk) 13:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Reordering contents in the new template

I just made some minor changes to the new template (History > General, abc in Applications). I think there is more revamp needed - order it all a little bit (move something from General to Others, maybe create "Lists" section etc.)--Kozuch (talk) 13:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You are probably quite right. Give me a few more minutes to implement it across the pages as described above and then feel free to edit away! I will drop a note on this page when I think I am done - shouldn't be long! - Ahunt (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm probably going to open up a whole can of worms here - but surely "Linux kernel" and "Linus Torvalds" should come before "GNU Project" and "Richard Stallman" (in their respective categories)? The GNU Project is obviously part of Linux-related history (which is part of the Linux kernel bit at present), so, in my opinion, shouldn't precede it. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 14:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I put them in alphabetical order by displayed name in the template (as opposed to the article name it links to), except for the two people's names, which are alphabetical by last name. That's just me, however, there is no rule that says that these templates need to be in alphabetical order - they could be better in some sort of logical order instead or order of (someone's) ranking of importance. I am going to leave the template alone now, so do jump in and see if you can make it better - I just ask for you to leave some sort of rationale in your edit summary to avoid confusion!! - Ahunt (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, if everything is ordered alphabetically (albeit by surname for Linus and Richard) then I guess that's fair enough. I always try to leave something useful in my edit summary so as not to confuse others. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 14:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's just go with alphabetical for everything, seriously. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Template's future - content and name

I am probably about to fire off a great debate, but I am starting to think that either the template should be renamed to "Free software" or "Free software" template should be newly created. Actually, the really correct name would be "Free and Open Source Software" while this term is being generally used by experts. Then, debates whether "GNU" and "Richard Stallman" should be in this template would be simply over.

Renaming to FOSS would be the best I thing as it is more general term and actually contains "Linux" and "Open source software". For both Free software and Open source software article I have proposed to clearly state the difference between these two in both articles with optional merge in one article. There has been some edits to Free software since, but the issue remains I think. More background info is here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kozuch (talk • contribs) 15:10, 23 March 2008

An interesting issue. I think that there definitely needs to be a "Free and Open Source Software" navigation template, but that there also needs to be a Linux template, too. I work a lot on aviation articles and there seems to be no problem in that area of Wikipedia with pages having multiple nav templates. See Beechcraft Model 18 for an example.

I would suggest that we create a new "Free and Open Source Software" template and leave this Linux template to grow over time on strictly Linux topics. If we can get some consensus that this is the way to proceed then I would be willing to start by constructing a Free and Open Source Software nav template, although I would need lots of help filling it out and completing the topics that should be included - Ahunt (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Taking the request above to heart, I have started work on a Free and Open Source Software nav template. I would emphasize that this is just a basic start - it is no where near finished! I would appreciate it if other editors watching this page would have a look and edit the proposed template at User:Ahunt/Sandbox and let's see if we can create something worth going "live" with or not! - Ahunt (talk) 13:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I think also that it is probably the best to have both Linux and FOSS templates, as I like to see topics nicely distinguished when possible. Seeing the proposal, I think it can go "live" right away... there are many more worse already "live" templates than this! FOSS template should have been here ages ago already to tie the scattered FOSS content little bit together :).--Kozuch (talk) 15:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement and for your edits on the proposed template. I don't have a problem having it go live right away - that will give more editors a change to have a kick at it. I have some doubts about the idea of listing applications listed on it, as there are tens of thousands of them. But let's go live and and see how it evolves. Perhaps you can help me spread it around on the pages it should go onto? - Ahunt (talk) 17:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

For anyone watching this page, the new template is at Template:FLOSS. Please feel free to edit it and spread it to article pages! - Ahunt (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Does this template need...

...a {{documentation}} page? Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

It's good practice to always use them for templates. It keeps interlang and category links off the main template and means that the main template logic can be protected if it's high-profile without preventing people from updating them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

andrew morton

I think andrew morton should be added. He is one of the lead kernel devs. jono Bacon is just a comminity manager for ubuntu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.246.100 (talk) 14:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then he can be added, but not by deleting other people who are already in the list. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 16:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

SOHO citations

Vector Linux design around SOHO. SOHO is usually a small scale buisness hosted at home enviroments in case if you guys don't know, its similar to Thin Client, except it has more functionality. I am thinking Home Networking should probably be added also. --Ramu50 (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

This link goes to Small office/home office which is an article about having an office in your home - there is no mention of Linux in it. Is this a mistaken link, or am I missing something here? The disambiguation page Soho (disambiguation) provides no clue as to anything with a connection to Linux either. Can you please shed some light on what you are trying to link to? - Ahunt (talk) 23:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Just more of Ramu50's contentious navbox inclusions. It's only tangentially related, and doesn't belong here. I've removed it again. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Because you could perhaps use Linux in your home office? Beats me! Thanks for removing it again! - Ahunt (talk) 00:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you even know what SOHO is. SOHO is classification of the size or type of business, therefore it must refer to small office / home business. The SOHO articles doesn’t need to provide any sources of Linux. Because that is NOT what the article is about. And FYI loser (Chris), in case you don’t know how to read the sources provided. The links clearly shows that they are Linux OS developed for SOHO, so you can put your losers WP:OR thoughts away for own mental matters.

And by the To Hell with You for your fucking Loser Attitude, the same old idoit and immature of a 2 year just like George. I said before, I need not to respect anyone who doesn't treat the same respect as others, and as for you, your so-called "claim expertise" with the constant overpride of working at Sun Microsystem clearly shows your lack of understanding in the industry. So why don't just get a life as a vigrant, before you become one of the layoff employees that Sun Microsystems is planning and make any more disgrace to Wikipedia. --Ramu50 (talk) 18:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)