Re: [seul-edu] Software Freedom Season

["Richard Smedley" <richard.smedley@futurenet.co.uk>]

Scott Wheeler wrote:
> 
> 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. 

Hello Scott,

While I am often wrong, here I am quite correct 8-/

> Applications that fit the "Open Source
> Definition" are "Free Software". 

That is more or less true, but there is plenty
of software available as 'open source' which
unfortunately does /not/ follow OSD.

> Likewise, "Free Software" *is* "Open Source
> Software". 

Yes, this is a /by-product/ of freedom :-)

> Sure, the motivations behind the two groups are different, 

Agreed :-(

> but the
> terms of use are (almost always) identical. 

No

> 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.

All interactions are beneficial - this is a biological principle.
But this doesn't really add anything.
 
> > 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,

Where I come from that's a rather serious accusation,
but I'll allow for cultural differences :^/

> 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

I am familiar with the OSD - are you familiar 
with its history? It came about in response to 
all the non-Free software marketed as 'open source'.

Free Software is unambiguous - it is about freedom.
Open source implies access to the source code -
definitions were tagged on to cover redistribution and
derived works as various large companies took advantage
of community good will and post-Netscape 'Open Source'
hype to market their products as part of a larger
movement upon which they were freeloading :-(
 
> 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.

Yes - they are explicitly drawing a parallel - and
they can do so because of the ambiguity created by
the term 'Open Source'

> 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."  ;-)

Is this intended to be a put-down? Excuse me
if I don't respond in kind ;-)
 
> > 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"),

OK, this is a long way off-topic. There are answers
to your questions, but I'm not going to give them
here.

> invite people to a conference that has an
> overwhelming Open Source slant,


Well /excuse me/ for having a day job ;-P


> and then quote someone that is quite an icon
> for the Open Source mindset.  ;-)

Ah, you did appreciate the irony :-)

> Sorry, I'm more passionate about this point of confusion than I am about
> either movement.  ;-)


You certainly seem to be ;-P

Can we get back on topic to the excellent idea for a
Software Freedom Day?

- Richard

-- 

Richard Smedley
Production Editor, Linux Format

Join us at LinuxExpo UK - 9-10 October 2002 - Olympia2, 
   London - http://www.linuxexpouk.co.uk

" ... indifference is a militant thing ... when it goes away it leaves
 smoking ruins, where lie citizens bayonetted through the throat.  It
 is not a children's pastime like mere highway robbery." Stephen Crane

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses.