[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DotGNU]"Open source" is not what we do here

From: Gopal.V
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]"Open source" is not what we do here
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 17:29:55 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

If memory serves me right, Matthew C. Tedder wrote:
> Except that Free Software falls under the Open Source definition perfectly,
> so it is a specific kind of Open Source.

        But the converse is not true -- that is what I understood, in my
short period in Free Software.

> It is perfect inaccurate to say that it is not Open Source -- I think 
> you mean that it should be distinguished from other Open Source variants.

        Free Software is not about providing access to source -- theoretically
it should be provided in physical media if requested. For OSS it is due to
an accident that the source gets distributed , not due to intention.

> Isn't the only principle distinguishing factor that GPL guarantees that
> derrivatives remain GPL-licensed?  

        AFAIK, GPL is not the only free software license. GPL (or GNU GPL) is
just a Free Software license with Copyleft .

> It's merely one of the unlimited variations allowed under the Open 
> Source definition.

In an analogy, could you say man is not worthy of mention, because he 
is just one among the infinite variety of species.

> That distinguishing factor is not "different" from the Open Source 
> definition because the Open Source definition allows one the 
> flexibility to do such things.

To make my point clear to call "Free Software" a variant of "Open Source"
would be like saying Humans are a variety of mammals. 

(putting us at par with the cat,rat and bat in everything except a 
few extra capabilities -- like think,create etc... -- "but the definition
of mammals allows for that flexibility"...).


        GPL has the crucial aspect of passing on freedom to its derievatives
just like humans pass on knowledge to their children. That makes all
the difference !

> Am I missing anything, because as far as I can see, this is all perfectly
> and clearly verifiable.

        Did I put this old ghost to rest or did I restart a flame war ?.        


PS: I hope my examples were good enough ! (ROTFLAMO !)
 The difference between insanity and genius is only measured by success

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]