[NTLUG:Discuss] Something to ponder (bad Linux enterprise experience article)

[Kenneth Loafman]

There is a scism in the ranks, FSF on one side and OSS on the other, 
both extremely adamant about semantics and how you say things.  The 
article's author wrote from the OSS standpoint.  Lance is a fan of FSF, 
and even though they say mostly the same thing, semantics is important 
to Lance AFAICT.  Once the SCO mess settles down, we all need to invent 
a neutral terminology to give the world a unified appearance.

...Ken


terry wrote:
> Lance Simmons wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 06:00:27PM -0500, Chris Cox wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Most of the problems raised have some validity... our attitudes need
>>> adjusting... I see it even on the NTLUG list from time to time.
>>> Patience and understanding are key.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> The article spoke of "Open Source" instead of "Free Software" and
>> "Linux" instead of "GNU/Linux",  so I stopped reading after the first
>> line.  :)
>>
>>  
>>
> You'll need to explain your self a little better, at least to me.
> Using the term "Open Source" instead of "Free Software"?    What do you 
> mean by that?
> 
> I guess I understand "Linux" instead of "GNU/Linux" would be more 
> accurate, but I think he knows and expects his readers to know, he's 
> just saying Linux for short.  No big deal? Right?
> 
> But I think "Open Source software" is a good description for what we use 
> and advocate here.  Right?  Wrong?
> 
> It doesn't necessarily have to be free, does it?  (At least not all of 
> it.)   ??
> 
> I think most of us don't mind paying for at least some of the software 
> we use.  Right? Wrong?
> 
> Maybe I'm missing your point?
>