In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jay Belanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > "Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 *** _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
