Re: The 2% discussion - "Free Software" or "Open Source Software"
Adonay Felipe Nogueira schreef op do 16-11-2017 om 11:25 [-0200]: > Finally, Stallman also states ([1]) that supporters/followers/proponents > --- and projects supporting/following --- free/libre software > *philosophy* should avoid both "FOSS" (because of the misleading "free" > part which reminds people of "gratis") and "FLOSS" (because it's too > neutral). Important to note is that he does prefer "FLOSS" for neutrality[2]: > Thus, if you want to be neutral between free software and open source, > and clear about them, the way to achieve that is to say “FLOSS,” not > “FOSS.” > > We in the free software movement don't use either of these terms, > because we don't want to be neutral on the political question. We > stand for freedom, and we show it every time—by saying “free” and > “libre”— or “free (libre)”. -- Carmen Bianca Bakker Technical Intern Free Software Foundation Europe e.V. [2]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: The 2% discussion - "Free Software" or "Open Source Software"
Hi Adonay, > As is already present in the reference I made to Stallman's talk, some > of the differences in the ideology of those two groups are visible in > the choice of license type, presence (or absense) of license enforcement > (and how it's made) and how they behave when noticing derivatives that > implement digital handcuffs or non-free parts when these adaptations use > their project's product/result (which is assumed to be free/libre). I would posit though that to the extent there's a difference between two groups (I'm not convinced there are, at least not so distinctly), then the difference is not between whether they use "Free Software" or "Open Source" as a term, but precisely the differences you mention. It would seem irrefutable there are groups which prefer permissive licensing, and there are groups which prefer copyleft licensing. But it seems divisive and unnecessary to ascribe on those groups some general views of what term they may or may not use. -- Jonas Öberg Executive Director FSFE e.V. - keeping the power of technology in your hands. Your support enables our work, please join us today http://fsfe.org/join ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: The 2% discussion - "Free Software" or "Open Source Software"
Interesting indeed. I vote for using terms that define our values, not neutral ones. Personallyq, I'm an activist, not an user. I want to spread my values, not rely on neutral term just "to reach" more people. If I reach more pople in the process, that's OK, but not a priority for me as free/libre software activist. I don't care for the "quantity" of people I reach for, I care for the "quality" of my message and the "quality" of my activism. I also try to copy/transport/mimic my personal values in my projects or in the projects I contribute to, so that I'm always "nitpicking" by mentioning the importance of free/libre software *philosophy* over time --- over and over when I have the chance, time and patience to do so. If however, I feel that I'm in an environment/project where it mainly focuses on "open source" (no matter if they use terms such as "fre/libre software" or "open source"), despite also doing the same thing as described in the previous paragraph, I sometimes feel less motivated to continue working on that project or tend to take/view the project's product/result with a grain of salt. Finally, Stallman also states ([1]) that supporters/followers/proponents --- and projects supporting/following --- free/libre software *philosophy* should avoid both "FOSS" (because of the misleading "free" part which reminds people of "gratis") and "FLOSS" (because it's too neutral). [1] <http://audio-video.gnu.org/video/2015-10-24--rms--free-software-and-your-freedom--seagl--speech.ogv> (under CC BY-SA 4.0). Matthias Kirschner <m...@fsfe.org> writes: > Hello all, > > I thought you might be interested in that blog post: > http://k7r.eu/2-percent-discussion-free-software-or-open-source-software/ > > Scott Peterson from Red Hat this week published an article "Open > Source or Free Software". It touches on a very important > misunderstanding; people still believe that the terms "Open Source > Software" and "Free Software" are referring to different software: > they are not! Scott asked several interesting questions in his article > and I thought I share my thoughts about them here and hopefully > provoke some more responses on an important topic. > > Would be interested in your views. > > Regards, > Matthias -- - https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno - Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com gratis). - "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo. - Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard - Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV. - Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: The 2% discussion - "Free Software" or "Open Source Software"
Personally, knowing and being involved closely to the development/history of both Free and Open Source Software during the past 20yrs I think there is no point of trying to compare the 2 entities or distinguish one from another. I rather see them one depending on another, meaning without Free Software I doubt that the Open Source Software would have existed but not vice versa and that clears almost everything. The way I see is that Free Software is the entity father (as per my comment on Scott's article) and the Open Source is the child entity. Also making a comparison in terms of value I don't see it as a correct approach, again referring to the relationship between the 2 that I have just mentioned above. I'd mostly describe Free Software as a theorem and the Open Source is the module that puts into application that theorem. Stallman might disagree with me on this statement but I am use to him nowadays:-). I know that the term Open Source is more popular these days simply because the term Free Software gets people into a confusion. Not everyone is keen to study the history or dig into the terminology or the meaning of something like the term Free Software. As Italian, it is easier in my language for example because in Italian the 2 terms are completely separate, Freedom and Free vs Libero and Gratis. That helps/helped a lot in my case but as Matthias mentioned in his article it is not the same in many other languages and in particular in English. Either way, I find myself very comfortable to explain that the 2 are the exact same thing with addition of the reliance (or the existence should I say again) from one to another and I have no issues in using either of the terms. Today is more popular Open Source, that sounds perfect to me and I will stick with that but at the same time in a simple sentence (it takes 1-2 seconds and no need to tell the all history every time and to everyone) I can describe what I just stated in this email, to make sure people understands that they are pretty much the same. Not sure if I explained myself, I hope I did and I'd actually love to have a discussion like this:-) On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Matthias Kirschner <m...@fsfe.org> wrote: > Hello all, > I thought you might be interested in that blog post: > http://k7r.eu/2-percent-discussion-free-software-or-open-source-software/ > > Scott Peterson from Red Hat this week published an article "Open > Source or Free Software". It touches on a very important > misunderstanding; people still believe that the terms "Open Source > Software" and "Free Software" are referring to different software: > they are not! Scott asked several interesting questions in his article > and I thought I share my thoughts about them here and hopefully > provoke some more responses on an important topic. > > Would be interested in your views. > Regards, > Matthias > > -- > Matthias Kirschner - President - Free Software Foundation Europe > Schönhauser Allee 6/7, 10119 Berlin, Germany | t +49-30-27595290 > Registered at Amtsgericht Hamburg, VR 17030 | (fsfe.org/join) > Contact (fsfe.org/about/kirschner) - Weblog (k7r.eu/blog.html) > ___ > Discussion mailing list > Discussion@lists.fsfe.org > https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion > ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
The 2% discussion - "Free Software" or "Open Source Software"
Hello all, I thought you might be interested in that blog post: http://k7r.eu/2-percent-discussion-free-software-or-open-source-software/ Scott Peterson from Red Hat this week published an article "Open Source or Free Software". It touches on a very important misunderstanding; people still believe that the terms "Open Source Software" and "Free Software" are referring to different software: they are not! Scott asked several interesting questions in his article and I thought I share my thoughts about them here and hopefully provoke some more responses on an important topic. Would be interested in your views. Regards, Matthias -- Matthias Kirschner - President - Free Software Foundation Europe Schönhauser Allee 6/7, 10119 Berlin, Germany | t +49-30-27595290 Registered at Amtsgericht Hamburg, VR 17030 | (fsfe.org/join) Contact (fsfe.org/about/kirschner) - Weblog (k7r.eu/blog.html) ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
