Re: open source or free software?
On 31/08/14 15:05, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 09:42:00PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> On 8/31/14, Werner Baumann <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> I don't feel the need to talk about "open soure" on depian-project at
>>> the moment. But if you do, don't forget the origins. A good summary is
>>> at http://oreilly.com/openbook/opensources/book/raymond2.html. It is
>>> really worth reading from first hand what the intentions of the
>>> Open-Source-campaign are.
>>> I especially like this bit:
>>> "It seemed clear to us in retrospect that the term "free software" had
>>> done our movement tremendous damage over the years. Part of this
>>> stemmed from the well-known "free-speech/free-beer" ambiguity. Most of
>>> it came from something worse--the strong association of the term "free
>>> software" with hostility to intellectual property rights, communism,
>>> and other ideas hardly likely to endear themselves to an MIS manager."
>> That is funny.
>>> And so I will stay with the communist term "free software".
>> It seems to me the term "libre software" resonates reasonably
>> unambiguously throughout 'the community'. Good luck getting
>> the FSF to use that term though... there are many years of
>> 'investment' in the term "free software" and it is embedded
>> deeply in license terms, and documentation.
> Hi Zenaan,
> No, in fact rms will quite happily use the libre word - wherever
> possible I use FLOSS - Free/Libre/Open Source Software - and emphasise
FLOSS, DFSG, OSI - all these are acronyms and unfortunately acronyms are
not great with the public at large. On the other hand, acronyms are
usually the most explicit and hardest for people to hijack or redefine.