| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
that's OpenSourcethat's OpenSourcePosted Apr 14, 2006 22:07 UTC (Fri) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018)In reply to: that's OpenSource by niner Parent article: A first look at Zfone (NewsForge) michich is right: Free Software == Open Source Software. The Free Software wording (from RMS) was to scary for corporations, so IBM and friends created the Open Source name for it. Freedom can be scary for some! Openness seems to be fine though ;-)
(Log in to post comments)
Wrong Posted Apr 15, 2006 13:18 UTC (Sat) by Los__D (subscriber, #15263) [Link] That is as wrong as it can be, according to the FSF: Why ``Free Software'' is better than ``Open Source''
Not that sure! Posted Apr 16, 2006 6:18 UTC (Sun) by lacostej (subscriber, #2760) [Link] We can make and (unfortunately) ought it correct given the correct use of capitalization.
Free Software > free software-
which can be translated into:
Open Source is always open source while open source _may_ be Open Source.
Don't forget that everybody on the other side of the FOSS fence plays with the words. Most download sites categorize FOSS as Freeware, some compagnies play voluntary or not with the words open and free, etc.
We should really invent a new word, foss software, and protect it from (accidental or not) abuse.
FSF Free Software != OSI Open Source, though close Posted Apr 17, 2006 1:09 UTC (Mon) by kmself (subscriber, #11565) [Link] The terms are not identical, though they are close. FSF speaks of specific freedoms, in a given software work, which the OSI Open Source Definition applies to licensing terms and is specifically granted (or denied) to a particular license by the OSI board. While the effective meanings are very close, there are licenses the OSI board has recognized as OSD compliant which the FSF does not recognize, and there are licenses which have not yet been reviewed by the OSI board which pass the FSF four freedoms test. To this extent, the terms differ by their application. That's the pragmatic difference. On the moral side of the debate, the FSF is fundamentally about software freedoms, while the Open Source Definition and OSI were formed in large part to make the applied concepts of free software more paletable to business. I've come to feel that RMS is largely correct in stating that without the freedoms and moral aspects, Open Source is a rather empty concept. That said, I'll use both terms (with a strong preference to Free Software) in discussions, as suits the audience.
|
|
||||||||||||