Re: [DotGNU]PHILOSOPHY file

[S11001001]

Daniel Carrera wrote:
> Free Software and Open Source Software *are* the same thing.
> (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html)
>
> It is the movement philosophies that differ, not the software licensing.

I agree totally on this point 
<http://subscribe.dotgnu.org/pipermail/developers/2002-March/002545.html>.

BTW the threaded archives for March haven't updated since the 21st.

> Also, in the PHILOSOPHY file, I would suggest using the terms "Liberated"
> and "Software Freedom" whenever possible.  These carry all the meaning of
> "Free Software" without the ambiguity.

I think that might be too drastic a step. FS has used the same name the whole 
time, and changing that name is an extreme step, like releasing a new version 
of the GPL ;)

I remember someone mentioning about how Free had a vague meaning, but there is 
nothing to be done about this. Also, it serves as a good index of how many 
people actually know about FS; if you say it, and they think you are referring 
to 0-cost, then they haven't; if you say it, and they know what you are talking 
about, or try to show how smart and in-the-know they are by mentioning GNU, 
they have heard of it.

Apologies for my ridiculous gender avoidance in the above paragraph.

--
Shoot me again.
Just proving that the quickest way to solve the problem is to post a
whine to the newsgroups: within moments the solution presents itself to
me, and meanwhile my ass is hanging out on the Net... *sigh*...
        -- Dave Phillips, address@hidden, about problem solving via news