gnu-linux-libre
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Request for Endorsement for ConnochaetOS


From: Henry Jensen
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Request for Endorsement for ConnochaetOS
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 21:13:04 +0200

Hello Sam,

On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:00:22 +0200
Sam Geeraerts <address@hidden> wrote:

> In any case, it's clear that using the term "free software" over "open 
> source" should be encouraged within FSDG distro communities. I think 
> it's not necessary to make an FSDG rule for this, but that it's an 
> indicator of a community's strength.

I am not sure what you mean by "a community's strength." 

I agree that it is good to encourage the term "free software" over
"open source". But I still don't think that this is a crucial point.

Like you said, many say "open source" when they mean "free software". 
I admit, sometimes I use the term "open source" as well in discussions 
when I speak with people who are unfamiliar with free software -
because the term "open source" is more known than "free software" and
"free software" is confused with "Freeware" very often. Often there is
simply not enough time to explain the difference between "Freeware" and
"free software". What matters is the message that is transmitted.

For example, if I tell someone who is unfamiliar with free software
"With open source software you have the freedom to use and to modify
the software, and  additionally to redistribute the software and your
modifications. That's why I recommend to use it" it should be clear
what I mean. If I would use the term "free software" instead and the
person confuses it with "Freeware" this would lead to false conclusion.
This example isn't out of the blue, it really happened once, when
someone redistributed a "Freeware" program, which was forbidden by the
license of that proprietary program. "But you said, that I can ..." Bad
mistake.

I prefer the term "free software" as well, and as I told before, I am
willing to correct the term "open source" in our wiki if and when I
encounter it. But as long as the criteria of the FSDG are met (i. e. no
non-free software is recommended) I don't see a reason to establish
some kind of authentic language.



Regards,

Henry











reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]