[Top][All Lists]

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

www/philosophy open-source-misses-the-point.html

From: Richard M. Stallman
Subject: www/philosophy open-source-misses-the-point.html
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:03:37 +0000

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       09/06/22 15:03:37

Modified files:
        philosophy     : open-source-misses-the-point.html 

Log message:
        Add some small points.


Index: open-source-misses-the-point.html
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html,v
retrieving revision 1.27
retrieving revision 1.28
diff -u -b -r1.27 -r1.28
--- open-source-misses-the-point.html   21 Apr 2009 14:43:57 -0000      1.27
+++ open-source-misses-the-point.html   22 Jun 2009 15:03:33 -0000      1.28
@@ -102,7 +102,9 @@
 <p>Unfortunately, all the alternatives in English have problems of
 their own.  We've looked at many alternatives that people have
 suggested, but none is so clearly &ldquo;right&rdquo; that switching
-to it would be a good idea.  Every proposed replacement for
+to it would be a good idea.  (For instance, in some contexts the
+French/Spanish word "libre" can be used, but people in India do not
+recognize the word at all.)  Every proposed replacement for
 &ldquo;free software&rdquo; has some kind of semantic
 problem&mdash;and this includes &ldquo;open source
@@ -144,6 +146,12 @@
   though the specific licensing agreements vary as to what one is
   allowed to do with that code.</p></blockquote>
+<p>The New York Times
+has <a 
+stretched the term</a> to refer to user beta testing &mdash; letting a
+few users try an early version and give confidential feedback &mdash;
+which proprietary software developers have practiced for decades.</p>
 <p>Open source supporters try to deal with this by pointing to their
 official definition, but that corrective approach is less effective
 for them than it is for us.  The term &ldquo;free software&rdquo; has
@@ -346,7 +354,7 @@
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2009/04/21 14:43:57 $
+$Date: 2009/06/22 15:03:33 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->

reply via email to

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