Still waiting for the obligatory RMS "Anti-Torvalds" rant. Also this doesn't seem to be the announcement of "We are moving to git as of this date" but rather "Why don't we move over to git" proposal
What other synonyms would you prefer using with respect to RMS and his obsessive-compulsive need to denounce Linus and Linux every time as "GNU Linux" instead of "Linux"?
Well, he only obsesses over that when you refer to the OS. If you're just referring to the kernel, he thinks it's ok to call it Linux. And he doesn't think Android is GNU/Linux.
I call that a bit crazy, but also crazy reasonable, because GNU really is the foundation of the OS, along with Linux.
The point is not so much the size (which has changed over the years) but how foundational it is. You can remove without replacement almost everything else from that pie chart except Linux and GNU and still have a functional OS, but without any coreutils or Linux or a replacement for either you don't have much of an OS left.
If anything it shows how silly it is to call the operative system for "linux". The term distributions and operative systems has become synonymous, and distributions dwarfs both Linux and GNU.
The operative system running on my laptop and servers is called Debian. The kernel is just one of many packages available in the repository and can be replaced by a single command. Its not even the most significant important package, since libc has a higher impact during upgrades and package dependency.
For better or worse, operating systems are typically named for their kernel. I don't see Stallman making a similar argument over the naming of various proprietary Unices, or of Windows (NTOS kernel + Win32 API, for a time, at least as of ~2000, I don't stay current).
And yes, I understand RMS's interest in GNU and keeping it in currency. And refer to "GNU/Linux" quite frequently myself.
He doesn't have a problem with git per se, at least not overtly. I think the confusion is that Emacs went with Bazaar over Git in 2008 essentially because it was a GNU project (and Arch had faded into obscurity by that point):
>We should use Bzr because that is becoming a GNU package. GNU packages should show loyalty to each other when possible, and in this case it is possible.[1]
But now its main repository is managed with git[2], Savannah as a whole makes extensive use of git,[3] and Stallman tacitly supports git by linking to git repos from his personal website.[4]
Probably because the FSF doesn't own the copyright for it. Without the copyright, you can't do fun things like forcing everyone to upgrade to the GPL3.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9292209
But otherwise, rms uses git quite alright. Let's not portray him as any crazier than he actually is.