Re: Open source - Free software

[Barry Margolin]

In article <87psdgayer.fsf@vh213602.truman.edu>,
 Jay Belanger <belanger@truman.edu> wrote:

> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> 
> > In article <mailman.7537.1159443714.9609.gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org>,
> >  "Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >> "Free Software" is not "Open Source", since Open Source also means
> >> non-free software.
> >
> > By that logic, dogs aren't mammals, because mammals also include cats.
> 
> Heh.  I suppose it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
> Sometimes it means "equals", sometimes it means "subset of".

True.  And sometimes it means "has the quality of", as in "Apples are 
round".

Elsethread you'll see statements like "free software is open source, but 
open source software is not necessarily free".  All these I think make 
it clear that it's understood that the two classes are *not* the same, 
and we're discussing how they're different, not *if* they're different.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***