Project planning software gnu

JavaScript license information. Read more. Free Software Foundation! From Free Software Directory. Jump to: navigation , search. Licensing License.

Links to the home pages of all current GNU packages are given below, using their identifiers rather than long names for brevity. They are sorted alphabetically from left to right.

GNU packages are occasionally decommissioned, generally because they've been superseded by, or integrated into, other packages. Here is the list; we leave the old project pages up when they existed :. We defend the rights of all software users.

There are also other ways to contact the FSF. The modern computers of the era, such as the VAX or the , had their own operating systems, but none of them were free software: you had to sign a nondisclosure agreement even to get an executable copy.

This meant that the first step in using a computer was to promise not to help your neighbor. A cooperating community was forbidden. If you want any changes, beg us to make them. The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that says you are not allowed to share or change software—is antisocial, that it is unethical, that it is simply wrong, may come as a surprise to some readers. But what else could we say about a system based on dividing the public and keeping users helpless?

Readers who find the idea surprising may have taken the proprietary software social system as a given, or judged it on the terms suggested by proprietary software businesses. Software publishers have worked long and hard to convince people that there is only one way to look at the issue. The real message of these statements is in the unstated assumptions they take for granted, which the public is asked to accept without examination.

Let's therefore examine them. One assumption is that software companies have an unquestionable natural right to own software and thus have power over all its users. If this were a natural right, then no matter how much harm it does to the public, we could not object. Interestingly, the US Constitution and legal tradition reject this view; copyright is not a natural right, but an artificial government-imposed monopoly that limits the users' natural right to copy.

Another unstated assumption is that the only important thing about software is what jobs it allows you to do—that we computer users should not care what kind of society we are allowed to have.

A third assumption is that we would have no usable software or would never have a program to do this or that particular job if we did not offer a company power over the users of the program.

This assumption may have seemed plausible, before the free software movement demonstrated that we can make plenty of useful software without putting chains on it. If we decline to accept these assumptions, and judge these issues based on ordinary commonsense morality while placing the users first, we arrive at very different conclusions.

Computer users should be free to modify programs to fit their needs, and free to share software, because helping other people is the basis of society.

With my community gone, to continue as before was impossible. Instead, I faced a stark moral choice. The easy choice was to join the proprietary software world, signing nondisclosure agreements and promising not to help my fellow hacker. Most likely I would also be developing software that was released under nondisclosure agreements, thus adding to the pressure on other people to betray their fellows too.

I could have made money this way, and perhaps amused myself writing code. But I knew that at the end of my career, I would look back on years of building walls to divide people, and feel I had spent my life making the world a worse place. I had already experienced being on the receiving end of a nondisclosure agreement, when someone refused to give me and the MIT AI Lab the source code for the control program for our printer. The lack of certain features in this program made use of the printer extremely frustrating.

So I could not tell myself that nondisclosure agreements were innocent. I was very angry when he refused to share with us; I could not turn around and do the same thing to everyone else. Another choice, straightforward but unpleasant, was to leave the computer field. That way my skills would not be misused, but they would still be wasted. I would not be culpable for dividing and restricting computer users, but it would happen nonetheless.

So I looked for a way that a programmer could do something for the good. I asked myself, was there a program or programs that I could write, so as to make a community possible once again? The answer was clear: what was needed first was an operating system. That is the crucial software for starting to use a computer. With an operating system, you can do many things; without one, you cannot run the computer at all. With a free operating system, we could again have a community of cooperating hackers—and invite anyone to join.

And anyone would be able to use a computer without starting out by conspiring to deprive his or her friends. As an operating system developer, I had the right skills for this job. So even though I could not take success for granted, I realized that I was elected to do the job. I chose to make the system compatible with Unix so that it would be portable, and so that Unix users could easily switch to it.

An operating system does not mean just a kernel, barely enough to run other programs. In the s, every operating system worthy of the name included command processors, assemblers, compilers, interpreters, debuggers, text editors, mailers, and much more. The GNU operating system would include them too. If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I?

If not now, when? It is about freedom. Here, therefore, is the definition of free software. In fact, the freedom to sell copies is crucial: collections of free software sold on CD-ROMs are important for the community, and selling them is an important way to raise funds for free software development. Therefore, a program which people are not free to include on these collections is not free software. Developing a whole system is a very large project.

To bring it into reach, I decided to adapt and use existing pieces of free software wherever that was possible. For example, I decided at the very beginning to use TeX as the principal text formatter; a few years later, I decided to use the X Window System rather than writing another window system for GNU.

Because of these decisions, and others like them, the GNU system is not the same as the collection of all GNU software. The GNU system includes programs that are not GNU software, programs that were developed by other people and projects for their own purposes, but which we can use because they are free software.

If I had remained on the staff, MIT could have claimed to own the work, and could have imposed their own distribution terms, or even turned the work into a proprietary software package. I had no intention of doing a large amount of work only to see it become useless for its intended purpose: creating a new software-sharing community.

This was a compiler designed to handle multiple languages, including C and Pascal, and to support multiple target machines. I wrote to its author asking if GNU could use it. He responded derisively, stating that the university was free but the compiler was not. I therefore decided that my first program for the GNU Project would be a multilanguage, multiplatform compiler.

Hoping to avoid the need to write the whole compiler myself, I obtained the source code for the Pastel compiler, which was a multiplatform compiler developed at Lawrence Livermore Lab. It supported, and was written in, an extended version of Pascal, designed to be a system-programming language. I added a C front end, and began porting it to the Motorola computer. But I had to give that up when I discovered that the compiler needed many megabytes of stack space, and the available Unix system would only allow 64k.

At this point, I concluded I would have to write a new compiler from scratch. That new compiler is now known as GCC ; none of the Pastel compiler is used in it, but I managed to adapt and use the C front end that I had written.

This enabled me to begin using Unix systems to do editing; having no interest in learning to use vi or ed, I had done my editing on other kinds of machines until then. At this point, people began wanting to use GNU Emacs, which raised the question of how to distribute it. With its code openly available, an open-source PM tool allows users to change parts of the software to improve usability or enhance its capabilities at no cost. The development, testing, use, and code reviews for open-source project management tools involves a community of users ensuring its usability and security.

The following list is our top picks for open-source PM software, in no particular order. Taiga is open-source PM software for agile teams. Organizations across industries like software development, telecommunication, education, and manufacturing use the software for project management.

The software supports teams that work across Scrum and Kanban frameworks. Taiga provides a project planning tool where users can define, align, and prioritize deliverables. It supports team interaction and collaboration, as well as providing visibility and insight with dashboards and reports.

Other features include integrated issue tracking, customization, and various integrations. Taiga being open source ensures quality, reliability, flexibility, and security. The basic edition is free, while the premium cloud edition includes unlimited projects and users, larger storage per project, and premium support.

An on-premise edition, either self-hosted or managed by the provider, is also available. OpenProject provides users a tool they can use for classic, agile, or hybrid project management. With open source license under GNU GPL v3, the project management software gives users the freedom to run, share, study, and modify it with flexibility.

Users can install the software on-premise within their infrastructure and have full control and ownership of their data. OpenProject includes task management for easy work tracking. Users can organize, prioritize, and assign tasks. All tasks and communication are housed together in one place for easy updating of project progress. This web-based project management tool provides access and easy sharing of information to all team members.

It also has project planning and scheduling, project portfolio management, time tracking, and custom workflows. Aside from the community edition, a self-hosted on-premise edition and an OpenProject-hosted cloud edition are available, with advanced capabilities like agile boards, SSO, intelligent workflows, and additional security features.

Orangescrum is simple project management and task management software for teams. It enables users to organize all information in one place with clarity on progress. A team can assign, manage, and evaluate the progress of all their tasks. It has subtasks, groups, sprints, Kanban and Scrum boards, custom labels and types, and task linking. Orangescrum also has user role management, a built-in time tracker, a resource utilization tool, Gantt charts, project templates, and reports.

Users can install the open-source PM software by downloading the community edition.