Re: [seul-edu] Software Freedom Season

[Scott Wheeler <wheeler@kde.org>]

Quoting Richard Smedley <richard.smedley@futurenet.co.uk>:    
    
> If Free Software is sometimes referred to as 'open source     
> software' then this is simply incorrect :-(    
    
No, you're really wrong here.  Applications that fit the "Open Source   
Definition" are "Free Software".  Likewise, "Free Software" *is* "Open Source   
Software".  Sure, the motivations behind the two groups are different, but the   
terms of use are (almost always) identical.   Any big Open Source/Free  
Software project has a mix of developers that adhere to both schools of  
thought; these developers benefit from each other, as does the community, by  
the mutual compatiblity of licensing schemes.  
    
> However Open Source merely means that one has access to    
> the source - it suggests no freedoms of use. This is why    
> a number of large suppliers of software (such as Microsoft)    
> have been happy to join the 'open source movement', and    
> make available some of their code :-/    
> Naturally freedom is not mentioned  :-(    
    
Before spreading falsehoods, please spend a few seconds to check this stuff    
out.  It took me 10 seconds to prove you wrong here:    
    
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php  
  
And no, Microsoft does not embrace "Open Source" nor have the ever been a part  
of the "Open Source movement".  They have never contributed back a single  
thing.  "Shared Source" (Microsoft's term) != "Open Source", though they're 
obviously trying to draw a parallel. 
    
And again, this is always an amusing topic when it comes up.  This is 
something that always gets argued from the sidelines, overwhelmingly by 
onlookers that don't even take advantage of said freedoms by digging into the 
source.  Almost all of the developers I know -- that consider themselves to be 
"Open Source" or "Free Software" developers basically think, "Freedom, great.  
Pragmatism, great.  Now let's get back to coding."  ;-) 
 
> It would be helpful in promoting Free Software to emphasise    
> the freedom, and to differentiate it from possible technical    
> advantages of access to source (with no freedoms)    
[snip] 
> Richard Smedley    
> Production Editor, Linux Format    
>     
> Join us at LinuxExpo UK - 9-10 October 2002 - Olympia2,     
> London - http://www.linuxexpouk.co.uk    
>     
> "And 1.1.81 is officially BugFree(tm), so if you receive any    
> bug-reports on it, you know they are just evil lies."    
> (Linus Torvalds, Linus.Torvalds@cs.helsinki.fi)    
 
I find it amusing that after that bit above that you work for a place called 
"Linux Format" -- which would piss the GNU's off (for just being "Open Source" 
and not emphasizing "freedom"), invite people to a conference that has an 
overwhelming Open Source slant, and then quote someone that is quite an icon 
for the Open Source mindset.  ;-) 
 
Sorry, I'm more passionate about this point of confusion than I am about 
either movement.  ;-) 
 
Cheers, 
 
-Scott