or
Jack Douglas
completed
### update 15 Jan: we've started a *nix private beta — please let us know if you'd like to participate!

---

TopAnswers is designed to host multiple communities, not just [databases](/databases) and TeX (currently in private beta).

If a group of people want to start a community here, they can post an answer on ["I'd like a new community on TopAnswers. How do I go about making that happen?"](/meta?q=211) requesting it, but we may also want to be proactive at this early stage, and actively seek out like-minded folk to start a few more early communities.

I've been thinking for some time that some variation of [U&L on SE](https://unix.stackexchange.com) would be viable here. One or two people have made [comments like this](/transcript?room=528&id=12163#c12163):

> In terms of SE equivalents, a Unix/Linux site would probably be most interesting to me initially…

We also have at least one high-rep (>50k) U&L user active here and interested in joining a private beta.

Last but not least, the following may be common ground for some of those currently giving their time to U&L communities like SE:

* [our principles](/meta?q=1) of being 'by the community, for the community', and not for profit
* perhaps more than for any other group, being 'the product' does not appeal to U&L folk, and that will never happen here
* our open source mindset, seen both in [releasing our own code](/meta?q=221#a580) and in our use of Linux/Apache/Postgres etc
* our love for [KISS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle) and 'do one thing and do it well' — two things Stack Exchange is leaving behind as it evolves

It might count against us with some that we chose to host on GitHub, but hey, we can still move to [Sourcehut](https://sourcehut.org/) when it comes out of beta ;)

If you are interested in joining a Linux or \*nix community here, please join in the conversation in the comments. We need to work out questions about scope, target expertise and more.
Top Answer
Caleb
Yes.

My suggestion would be to make the scope pretty broad, maybe even a little broader than the [U&L Stack Exchange site](https://unix.stackexchange.com/) was, covering Open Source operating systems and user environments (desktop  and cli):

* All distributions, both Linux, BSD, and old fashioned Unix. I would even go so far as to say that other Open Source kernels and platforms should be included when they crop up (e.g. [Haiku](https://www.haiku-os.org/) or [Plan 9](https://9p.io/plan9/)).
* All related OSS user space tool sets such as GNU tools.
* All desktop environments that are not specific to non-\*nix platforms.
* All shells that are not specific to another platform (no PowerShell).

Note I would include the above even in isolation on non-\*nix platforms, such as `bash` when run under the Windows Subsystem for Linux or X11 on MacOS (*ala* XQartz).
Can/should we start a Linux (or *nix) community on TopAnswers
Anonymous
Thanks
Jack Douglas replying to Anonymous
yes it is just https://topanswers.xyz/nix
Anonymous
I would like to add the *nix beta to my list of SE alternative sites. Is there a URL landing page for the *nix beta?
Anonymous replying to Jack Douglas
much thanks!
Jack Douglas replying to Anonymous
you should have access now
Anonymous
@Jack Hi, I'd like to join the *nix private beta
Monica replying to Jack Douglas
Cool, thanks!  I had noticed that *nix has gotten a slow start.  But things have also been hectic the last few days, which is why it took me this long to follow up on this.
Jack Douglas replying to Monica
@Monica I've added you to the Code Golf beta too as that one is currently much more active than *nix
Jack Douglas replying to hackerb9
'or later' is now an option :)
Jack Douglas replying to hackerb9
are you going to answer any of the meta questions already posted in there? It might help to get the ball rolling…
Jack Douglas replying to hackerb9
that would be more sensible, we'll change that
hackerb9
Opt-in is fine, too. Thanks.
hackerb9
Yes. I think I expected it to say "dual licensed".
Jack Douglas replying to hackerb9
that's now on the list. I do think it should be opt-in though rather than opt-out
Jack Douglas replying to hackerb9
the section that says "default additional license for code in new posts"?
hackerb9
As for for whether it was clear it was dual licensed, I understand it right away but when it came to the actual check box on the user preferences interface, I got confused since it didn't say "dual license". I checked it anyhow, hoping that's what it meant.
hackerb9 replying to Jack Douglas
An "or later" flag would be perfect. In fact, it would be nice if it was the default.
hackerb9 replying to Jack Douglas
Thanks. Hopefully the conversation will die down as the Unix Top Answers organically grows into itself, the same as Unix itself. 
Jack Douglas
::: quote 543 13755 2 dbdbdb 838585
Jack Douglas replying to Stephen Kitt — [*8 days ago*](#c13755)  
>as it's a common source of confusion I hope you don't mind me asking: is it clear that the 'code license' is additional to the main license that covers the entire post? In other words the original code sections are dual licensed.
:::
Jack Douglas
also:
Jack Douglas replying to hackerb9
Hi @hackerb9, welcome to TopAnswers. I've added you to the beta — but just to warn you it's really not built up any kind of steam so far. I think a few people getting stuck in to having a conversation about what direction we want to take will get things going, so I hope you are up for that. Re the license, I guess we want an 'or later' flag rather than a specific 3+ GPL license, do you agree?
hackerb9
Hi! I'd like to join the Beta test for the Unix site. I prefer my licenses to be upwards compatible with the future, so I always specify the version as an inequality (e.g., GPL ≥3.0). Any chance we can do that here? 
Monica replying to Jack Douglas
Thanks!
Skillmon replying to Jack Douglas
works smoothly. Thank you very much.
Jack Douglas replying to Skillmon
I've added you — if you wouldn't mind confirming you can see the community I'd be grateful.
Skillmon
I was never active on SE U&L, and my knowledge in this field is pretty much limited to what I need on a regular basis, but I'd be in.
Jack Douglas replying to Monica
I've added you to the access list @Monica :)
Monica replying to Jack Douglas
I'd like to observe the Unix beta too.  I doubt I'll have much to contribute (though I might have the occasional question), but I'd like to see how non-meta communities work here.  (Yeah ok I should also look at Databases more, too. :-) )
Stephen Kitt replying to Jack Douglas
yes, that makes perfect sense
Jack Douglas replying to Stephen Kitt
yes we need CC something-or-other to allow us to publish the whole post here. Even CC BY-NC-SA will do for us though so we are leaving it up to the contributor as far as possible
Stephen Kitt
(CC or something else of course.)
Stephen Kitt replying to Jack Douglas
Ah, the dual-license wasn’t clear to me: I understood it as meaning that the non-code would use one license, and the code would use another, not that the code would be dual-licensed. Admittedly it probably doesn’t make all that much sense to have a completely separate license for the code; CC-BY-SA-4.0 for everything (including code) + something else for the code seems more useful.
Jack Douglas replying to Stephen Kitt
as it's a common source of confusion I hope you don't mind me asking: is it clear that the 'code license' is additional to the main license that covers the entire post? In other words the original code sections are dual licensed.
Stephen Kitt
Thanks!
Jack Douglas replying to Stephen Kitt
Hi @Stephen, I've added you to the private beta and added MIT, GPLv2 and GPLv3 to the [additional licenses for code](https://topanswers.xyz/meta?q=24). If you feel there is a need for others, please let us know.
Stephen Kitt
Hi, I’d like to join the U&L beta too... (And could we have more licenses for code? I understand why LPPL is there, but outside the TeX TA I imagine it won’t see much use...)
PeterVandivier
party-parrot.gif
Jack Douglas
refresh and it should appear in your community list
Jack Douglas replying to PeterVandivier
I'm sure that would be fine @Peter
PeterVandivier
@Jack 🙋‍♂️i can't imagine i'll be able to contribute, but if watching from the wings is tolerated i'd like to be in on the U&L preview
Jack Douglas replying to Faheem Mitha
Thanks Faheem, I've added you to the member list!
Faheem Mitha
@Caleb I agree. I also think Unix system programming and related kernel stuff should be included. For some reason, U&L SE tries to push it to SO. I've never agreed with that.
Faheem Mitha
Having said that, I certainly would not advocate such a split on any other site.
Faheem Mitha
While it admittedly did not make much sense, it did have the effect of separating more user driven questions (Windows like questions) and more technical questions. Which may not have been such a bad thing.
Faheem Mitha
I don't think the AU and U&L split was completely ridiculous myself.
Faheem Mitha
Hi @JackDouglas, can you give me access to the private U&L beta on TA, please? Or whatever it's called here.
Jack Douglas
cc @holmanb, @Caleb, @David ^^^
Jack Douglas
Everyone who has responded here now has access to the new *nix private beta, where we can continue the discussion. If you aren't in yet and would like to join please ping me in here and I'll arrange access.
David replying to Caleb
So would "environments" allow for "shell script" type Q's [like this one](https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/372194)? (Which doesn't have an "accepted" answer because I was [waiting for yours](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/38240099#38240099)! 😬)
Caleb
Another hard call will be _Android_. Technically it would fit my scope — Linux kernel, open source stack on top, and all that. But I think I would draw the line at **not** allowing any app usage or development questions (which are more like SU or SO scopes) and just reserve it for the system architecture ones (i.e. not most Android users), ones about *nix environments on Android such as Termux, etc.
Caleb replying to David
Nice monkey wrench, but yes I think I'd have to include that. My scope suggestion has more to do with crossover in community interest than areas of expertise (for which tags will be more useful).
David
@Caleb "...other Open Source kernels and platforms..." : also [ReactOS](https://www.reactos.org/)? Given your bullets, that would seem to fit. That's a pretty broad scope, innit! :)
David replying to Jack Douglas
Good to hear what both @Caleb and @holmanb had to say on this. I never liked the split, but shaped my involvement according to that reality. Would much prefer a single site with no "that distro doesn't belong here" silliness (well, it was silly to me). Tags ftw!
holmanb
I see no reason to have a separate  for any one distro (regardless of how *special* the distro's users feel).  I think that proper tagging would be a more sustainable way to search and categorize subsets of this community.  
Caleb replying to Jack Douglas
Opinions on whether that split was a good thing _still_ differ, but one of the primary driving considerations was that Canonical wanted it as their official venue for questions (hence the scope being strictly limited to blessed releases at the exclusion of derivatives). They finally got rid of the extra Canonical navigation bar the site launched with and Canonical promotes other venues more now, but unless you plan to promote it as a replacement and get Canonical's blessing, I don't see there being enough momentum to even contemplate a similar split on TA.
Jack Douglas replying to David
Thanks! I gather people have strongly held opinions over whether there should be separate sites (AskUbuntu and U&L) — where do you sit on that one?
David
@Jack For sure. 👍 I've been more active on AskUbuntu, but used U&L, especially when on an out-of-scope distro (`*cough*` Mint `*cough*`) so no good on AU. Mint's in my distant past now, and in any case, short answer to your probe is that I would be very interested.
Caleb
Yes.