[Linux-aus] Who defines Open Source?

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Wednesday,  8 February 2006 at  8:42:24 +0800, Senectus . wrote:
> On 2/8/06, Leon Brooks <leon-linuxaus at cyberknights.com.au> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 08 February 2006 07:53, Paul Shirren wrote:
>>> while Free Software qualifies as Open Source, Open Source is
>>
>> [not]
>>
>>> necessarily Free Software.
>>
>> Cheers; Leon

I shouldn't get involved in this argument, and I'll try to keep away.
But this is exactly why I don't like the term "Open Source".  Ask the
man in the street what it means, without specifying context, and he'll
generally have little idea.  Ask him what "free software" means and
he'll have a pretty good idea.

> How is that possible?
> If the source is open then the software _must_ also be free, of course
> people _can_ pay for it if they want it compiled or package or
> supported (even if they just feel like paying for it to be nice).

If you go by the definition at
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php, you're right.  But
that's the problem: a term which requires a web site to define it is
not adequately comprehensible.  Leon's right, too, when he says it's
not necessary.  Plenty of software is available in source without the
rights laid down at opensource.org.

Greg
--
Greg Lehey, Senior Software Engineer
MySQL AB, http://www.mysql.com/
Echunga, South Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286   Mobile: +61-418-838-708
VoIP:  sip:4484 at sip.mysql.com, sip:0871270137 at sip.internode.on.net

Are you MySQL certified?  http://www.mysql.com/certification/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20060208/42b6a584/attachment.pgp