Hello Sam, On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:00:22 +0200 Sam Geeraerts <sam...@elmundolibre.be> 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