Are linux distribution names should be locked?

I just read a post by Lucas Nussbaum, where he complains about the fact, that there are some Ubuntu deviations, which have different names. I find this irrational. There were times, when we only had sort of one Linux operating environment. Then, as the time passed, it became the GNU/Linux OS, and then, as it is regarded today, it is a base for many different flavors of Linux Operating systems.

There are many people who ask the question: is there too many Linux distributions? But the answer to that question is bordering with the definition of Open itself: as long as one allows openness and provides means, there always will be someone who will customize the product to his/her own needs. And that includes the name change.

Why the author has no complains to Linux Mint distribution, which is largely based on Ubuntu? Who should decide when to provide new distribution name? I don't think it really matters.

What matters is that people use Linux, in any form and shape, and under any name they like. I would be glad to see my friends using Debian, [K|Ed|X]Ubuntu, Gentoo, Red Hat, Fedora or any other distribution, other that Windows. Why is the anger of the author is directed towards Linux users? Why not enjoy the fact that someone uses Linux to bring it to the people?

I don't care how would you call it - if it's Linux, I'm buying.

Novell unleashes hundreds of developers for SUSE Hack Week

Novell is setting its entire Linux engineering team loose to hack on whatever Linux or open source projectsinterest them for the week of June 25 - 29. To make it easier for hackers to find and publicize their projects,we've created an Idea Pool web site -- http://idea.opensuse.org -- where our ideas are shared and where we'll post updates.

read more | digg story