Re: Debian Free Software (FSF) or Open Source? (was Re; non-cd...)
Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:49:02PM -0400, Kevin Atkinson wrote:
> >
> > Ok the policy is good as a standard setting mile stone but not for
> > creating the best distribution which is freely available.
>
> I can't understand what you mean. Please elaborate.
>
I think that Debian should keep that guideline to identify to people
what is truly free but should adopt a slightly less strict guideline to
be able to include stuff like Qt, KDE and Mysql into the official
distributions.
> The dfsg is the only thing that ensures that Debian is freely available to
> everyone (and even more).
Yes it does. But unfortunately it limits what can go in it. Stuff that
is not trully-free but free-enough does not go in it when it goes into
almost every other distribution.
> The quality will be ensured by us developers.
Please elaborate.
> Indeed the difference between Open Source and Free Software is only a
> cosmetic one.
Ok I agree here based on if it follows the Open Source Definition and
only in that sense.
> "Open Source" was made to sell Free Software to suits.
>
> You may encounter other organizations, products and projects that carry the
> word "Open" in their name. Quite some of the are far away from being open
> (note spelling here).
>
> This is the reason why some people still prefer the name "Free Software". It
> is just for marketing reason and does not serve any technical purpose. The
> thing is the same, the name has changed. So what?
For the strict software guideline nothing has changed.
Howeve for the ultimate goals things have changes.
As I see it:
FSF) Develope high quality free software.
Open Source) Convince commercial organizations that free software is
high quality stuff.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: