On 04/02/2010 02:18 PM, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 23:56 -0600, charles zeitler wrote:
> Do what thou wilt
> shall be the whole of the Law.
>
>
> On 4/1/10, Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 04/02/2010 05:27 AM, charles zeitler wrote:
>>>
>>> 1) "free and open source software" is redundant ( if it's free
software )
>>>
>>
>> Not quite. FOSS is a umbrella term and using it is one way of avoiding
>> the free beer vs freedom confusion
>>
> yes, i can see that.... ( although i have seen some potentially
> misleading references to just "open source software" )
Also, GPL partisans insist that there is a difference between "truly
free" (i.e., GPL) software and "merely open-source" (i.e., non-GPL)
software.
No. The FSF (who are, presumably, GPL partisans) make it perfectly clear
that there are many non-GPL free software licences.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
Any software that allows its users all of the freedoms of the Free
Software Definition is free software, by definition.
Andrew.