Hi everyone,
in this discussion, as has been pointed out before, it's useful if people please remember this article, which is the comparison the FSFE points to officially when people ask:
https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/basics/comparison.en.html
I quote a relevant part:
The Free Software movement is a large and diverse community. People have different interests in Free Software and different reasons to participate. But these differences don't necessarily connect with the terms they use. A lot of people use the term Open Source even while highlighting the social and political dimension of Free Software while on the other hand there are people in our community who prefer the term Free Software but concentrate more on the practical benefits. Whether someone says Open Source or Free Software isn't necessarily an indication of their motivation.
So please, no grouping of people based on what terminology they use. It is divisive and unnecessary.
Best,
Hi everyone,
I swear this are my fist and *last* two cents about this topic
I'm considering (re)becoming a FSFE Supporter (ex Fellow) after some years of absence; I feel an urgency to to something after the (last) *desperation* [1] I suffered for the "MINIX on ring -3" "discovery", I hope to do it helping FSFE, FSF and cousins
almost 20 years after this https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html "It's Time to Talk About Free Software Again" (by Bruce Perens) I confess I feel *Comfortably Numb* about Open Source ad all related discussions, especially because we are - once again - **losing focus**: we all want a complete software stack (including ring -300) that respects all four user freedoms, it does not matter how much does it cost or how "cool" it will be for _any_ market vendor... do we?!?!?
*fortunately* there are several FSFE official statements that definitely and unequivocally clears the discourse about FSFE supporting the use of the term Free Software and _not_ of Open Source, a *sine qua non* condition for me to be a supporter of any software association
I refer to this statements: https://fsfe.org/about/basics/freesoftware.en.html#terminology «[Open Source] Nowadays, it is regularly used for everything between Free Software and the highly proprietary [software]»
https://fsfe.org/about/principles.en.html «interest in our issues also creates desire to exploit them for particular personal interests regardless of the medium- and long-term effects.»
although this is perplexing and somewhat contradictory: «We understand this sometimes means having to accept short-term or even medium-term disadvantages in order to remain true to our principles, which may be hard to communicate and occasionally even unpopular.» (disadvantages? what we are talking about?)
and lastly this is "the final word" by FSFE: https://fsfe.org/documents/whyfs.en.html «Examining the development of the Open Source Initiative after three years, it becomes apparent that the reasons to prefer the term Free Software have become even more true.» (I suppose that "after 3 years" means that page was written around 2001)
does FSFE considers that campaign still valid in 2017?
* Jonas Oberg [2017-11-17 16:50:25 +0100]:
[...]
please remember this article, which is the comparison the FSFE points to officially when people ask:
OK but please **all of us** also remember the above mentioned articles when people asks about Open Source
is it really so hard to politely say: "please use the term Free Software, its ALL about freedom"?
[...]
concentrate more on the practical benefits. Whether someone says Open Source or Free Software isn't necessarily an indication of their motivation.
I find it in direct contradiction with https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/basics/comparison.en.html#id-why-we-call-it-fr... in particular: «Language is important because it frames how people think about a subject. The different terms focus on different aspects, even if they describe the same software.»
this means that Open Source focus on a different motivation than what? than freedom
"Language is important", to me, it's *the* tombstone of the "Open Source" term
please consider I never mentioned Saint IGNUcius or others from heaven: I simply do not care who say what, I just care about the philosophy *and* philosophy is by definition inclusive :-D
So please, no grouping of people based on what terminology they use. It is divisive and unnecessary.
political declaration: I swear I'll respect - as she was my sister - anyone using the term "Open Source" and I'll be glad to work with her to achieve the full liberation of users from proprietary software domination
I'll just politely and firmly make her clear that she is using the *wrong* term :-)
ciao Giovanni
[1] yes I was also desperate when I understood how much Internet is broken http://youbroketheinternet.org/ and how much my smartphones are *not* controlled by me (even using LinegeOS... still studying ReactOS)
Hi,
We do prefer Free Software as a term and happily tell people so. We will never tell anyone they are wrong to say Open Source though, and we expect others to extend the same curtsey to us when we talk about Free Software.
Best Jonas
On November 17, 2017 7:31:26 PM GMT+01:00, Giovanni Biscuolo g@xelera.eu wrote:
Hi everyone,
I swear this are my fist and *last* two cents about this topic
I'm considering (re)becoming a FSFE Supporter (ex Fellow) after some years of absence; I feel an urgency to to something after the (last) *desperation* [1] I suffered for the "MINIX on ring -3" "discovery", I hope to do it helping FSFE, FSF and cousins
almost 20 years after this https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html "It's Time to Talk About Free Software Again" (by Bruce Perens) I confess I feel *Comfortably Numb* about Open Source ad all related discussions, especially because we are - once again - **losing focus**: we all want a complete software stack (including ring -300) that respects all four user freedoms, it does not matter how much does it cost or how "cool" it will be for _any_ market vendor... do we?!?!?
*fortunately* there are several FSFE official statements that definitely and unequivocally clears the discourse about FSFE supporting the use of the term Free Software and _not_ of Open Source, a *sine qua non* condition for me to be a supporter of any software association
I refer to this statements: https://fsfe.org/about/basics/freesoftware.en.html#terminology «[Open Source] Nowadays, it is regularly used for everything between Free Software and the highly proprietary [software]»
https://fsfe.org/about/principles.en.html «interest in our issues also creates desire to exploit them for particular personal interests regardless of the medium- and long-term effects.»
although this is perplexing and somewhat contradictory: «We understand this sometimes means having to accept short-term or even medium-term disadvantages in order to remain true to our principles, which may be hard to communicate and occasionally even unpopular.» (disadvantages? what we are talking about?)
and lastly this is "the final word" by FSFE: https://fsfe.org/documents/whyfs.en.html «Examining the development of the Open Source Initiative after three years, it becomes apparent that the reasons to prefer the term Free Software have become even more true.» (I suppose that "after 3 years" means that page was written around 2001)
does FSFE considers that campaign still valid in 2017?
- Jonas Oberg [2017-11-17 16:50:25 +0100]:
[...]
please remember this article, which is the comparison the FSFE points to officially when people ask:
OK but please **all of us** also remember the above mentioned articles when people asks about Open Source
is it really so hard to politely say: "please use the term Free Software, its ALL about freedom"?
[...]
concentrate more on the practical benefits. Whether someone says Open Source or Free Software isn't necessarily an indication of their motivation.
I find it in direct contradiction with https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/basics/comparison.en.html#id-why-we-call-it-fr... in particular: «Language is important because it frames how people think about a subject. The different terms focus on different aspects, even if they describe the same software.»
this means that Open Source focus on a different motivation than what? than freedom
"Language is important", to me, it's *the* tombstone of the "Open Source" term
please consider I never mentioned Saint IGNUcius or others from heaven: I simply do not care who say what, I just care about the philosophy *and* philosophy is by definition inclusive :-D
So please, no grouping of people based on what terminology they use. It is divisive and unnecessary.
political declaration: I swear I'll respect - as she was my sister - anyone using the term "Open Source" and I'll be glad to work with her to achieve the full liberation of users from proprietary software domination
I'll just politely and firmly make her clear that she is using the *wrong* term :-)
ciao Giovanni
[1] yes I was also desperate when I understood how much Internet is broken http://youbroketheinternet.org/ and how much my smartphones are *not* controlled by me (even using LinegeOS... still studying ReactOS)
Jonas Öberg Free Software Foundation Europe | jonas@fsfe.org Your support enables our work (fsfe.org/join)