I really like the GNU/k* notation; it highlights the separation between the kernel and the operating system in a very clear way. In this case it would be entirely accurate; Windows is standing on its head to look like a Linux kernel and does a pretty convincing job.

Unfortunately for projects related to WSL, which ultimately challenge some of the 'defaults' people expect, there is a tension between the name that is accurate and one that people will understand. For example, people are so tied to the notion that Ubuntu is a Linux distribution that calling it anything else would be confusing, despite the reality that Ubuntu is an operating system that just happens to have Linux as a kernel most of the time.

No, it's "GNU\Windows" ;)

I guess that's accurate, since there are zero lines of the Linux kernel in WSL.

I know this is a joke, but at the same time, it illustrated how influential the GNU project is. All thanks to RMS :). I don't care how unreasonable this man is, he is a great man.

I think GNU should just be rebranded and called Linux. Linux as an umbrella OS brand already includes a lot of software outside of GNU and GNU isn't a very recognized name - I've only heard people talk about it in the context of "that mad guy Stallman who dresses like the pope". The fight is already lost and has been lost for the last 20 years, just call yourselves Linux already, or maybe "Linux System Core". Then we'll be able to run Linux on BSD and the world will finally end.

Sadly, there's more GNU code in this than Linux code, so it's not entirely inaccurate.