Libre Software Project Names Suck

Oct. 9, 2024 [technology] [language] [libre]

I’ve decided I will no longer refer to Linux as GNU/Linux. Linux, with a capital L. I once thought it would lend itself to clarity and understanding, but it only leads to greater confusion. Most people already struggle to grasp simple concepts, so there is little point trying to subtly promote the details. And the real purpose behind the term ultimately serves to appease the sensibilities of Richard Stallman. Anyone with sufficient interest in Linux is already well aware of Stallman’s significant involvement. Those who don’t are not going to be swayed by such GNU-jitsu anyway. This necessitates going back through my works and sed ’s/GNU\///g’ing any instances of this contrivance.

And, more broadly, the names of many libre software projects are often tragic choices. The name of this very article was going to be “Free Software Projects…” but even the very designation of “free software” itself suffers from inexacting terminology. I’ve long thought that the FSF ought to change their name to the Software Freedom Foundation, or the Foundation for Software Freedom (if they’d like to retain their current acronym).

Bad naming can happen for varied reasons.

Placeholder names

Ex. Minetest
Anyone who has started a throwaway software project is probably familiar with lazily naming things like test.py or rendertest.cpp. Sometimes, it seems, a software can take off unexpectedly and carry the name along with it. A desperate stretch to bandaid this unfortunate name might take the direction that “Test” is referring to the game testing your skills.

Update October 22nd: With almost poetic timing, the Mintest project has decided to rename to “Luanti”. They finally did it. They finally dropped the test name. And it only took them nearly a decade and a half. Is Luanti a better name? Well, at least it doesn’t have “test” in it anymore.

Sequels

Ex. mat2, wget2
Creating sequel releases might make some sense in the commercial proprietary space. But libre software has no such incentive. So why do devlopers of such software insist on appending “2” to things?"
If the code requires a full rewrite, then just rewrite it! Or give it a new and unique name.

Alphabet soup

Ex. msmtp, ffmpeg
Not only does this fail to make the name self-descript, but also creates a pain for programs that are invoked from terminal. Alphabet soup names complicate recommending solutions to others, who may already be tepid on the notion of trying something that isn’t a household name or paid mainstream software.

‘Just a clone’

Ex. OpenSnitch, LibreOffice, anything OpenXYZ or LibreXYZ
Tends to establish the solution, however good it may be, as simply an alternative in layperson’s minds. It serves to diminish the significance of what are often really great programs.

Trying to be too witty

Ex. Canoeboot
Only those who know that it is a play on “GNU Boot”, specifically using Stallman’s silly insistence on hard G Gah-noo, will understand why it is named that way and that it doesn’t actually have anything to do with canoes. Granted, this does make it easier to lookup in search engines, as it avoids the issue of name collision. So they get some points back for that.

Any good name should succinctly denote what the program does or manipulates and should be human memorable as an utterable phrase. It should be forward thinking to avoid getting stuck with a title that inadequately represents the program. Free and open source software is absolutely littered with terrible names and it does a disservice to the overall perception of this otherwise fantastic work.