On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 21:57 +0000, Juha Siltala wrote: > On 2004-11-17, Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote: > > > In that context, terms like FLOSS or software-libre (or even FAIS(1) > > and FAIB(2)) shoud be used instead. IMO, of course. > > Social scientists are apparently standardizing on using the FLOSS term. I > just see it as a compromise and an effort to not piss any partisans off. > It seems to conveniently blur the difference between the Free Software > movement and Open Source, which is might be conceptually hazardous. I see it as a convenient amalgam when comparing OSS+FS vs. closed source. Sorta like the main branch in a taxonomy of software freeness, if you'd like. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B "It isn't necessary to be rich and famous to be happy. It's only necessary to be rich." Alan Alda
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part