Re: [Fsfe-uk] Useful background on FLOSS in education

[Ramanan Selvaratnam]

ian wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 08:34, Tom Coady wrote:
>
> > MJ Ray wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > http://www.educationau.edu.au/papers/open_source.pdf
                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^
Free Software is better
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html

> > > It is upsetting to see that misconceptions about free software which 
> > > originated in European government reports are now being exported 
> > > worldwide.  I would not recommend that anyone distributes this report, 
> > > but it provides interesting background into some other topics. 
> >
> >
> > It would be interesting to know which parts of this document you are 
> > referring to; the worst I could find was a certain neutrality, but then 
> > I did not read all 49 pages or 168 references ;)

I read only the first 7 pages. It even proclaims Linux and FreeBSD to be 
open software operating systems!
Would it not be more meaningful to describe FreeBSD (atleast) as a free OS?

The introductions opening phrases are flawed...
'The `open' in open source software is intended in the
philosophical sense of `open or free speech' rather than as a free (ie 
no cost) product.'

?!

and the article goes on to define Freeware and other models but not Free 
Software.

> I think on balance its supportive. Ok, some bits are a bit lacking from
> a purist perspective, but it certainly better than that QnetiQ study

This is not a purist perspective.
Yes, the QinetiQ study sucks.

> that was floating about. The critical judgement is whether it will get
> us more people converted to the idea of free software or fewer?

Where is the idea of Free Software in the first place?
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html


Best wishes,

Ramanan