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

[David]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 10:11:58AM -0500, terry wrote:
> Lance Simmons wrote:
> 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?

"Open source software" is that which meets the license terms of the
Open Software Foundation.  It's a definition based on the practical
aspects of getting and modifying the source code.  

The term "Free Software" is used to mean software licensed in such a
way as to provide the "four freedoms" defined by the Free Software
Foundation.  It's model license is the GNU General Public License.
The FSF's term has a political agenda.  It's not concerned with the
efficiency of your access to source code and ease of modification.
Free Software, and the GPL in particular, are concerned about
maintaining intellectual solidarity between programmers.  Favorable
economics is a convenient side effect.

The distinctions here are very fine.  Some people view discussing the
difference as counting angels dancing on pinheads.  It's not critical
to understand the nuances of the differences, and I don't claim to
understand them all myself.  The big thing to understand is that the
OSS people tend to have economic efficiency reasons for promoting
Linux, while FS people advocate the same software for political
reasons.


The Free Software Foundation's definitions:

    http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

FSF's list of licenses, and how FSF classifies them:

    http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html

Open Source Initiative's definition of "open source":

    http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition_plain.php


-- 
David Hayes
david at hayes-family.org