Re: octave presentation, part 2

[John W. Eaton]

On 19-Nov-2008, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:

| It is my understanding that Octave is both free software and open
| source (the development model).

As a part of the GNU project, we should try to avoid the term "open
source" when referring to Octave.

When I see the term "open source" I don't think of a development
model.  I think of a marketing campaign started in the 90's to avoid
talking about free software because there was some fear that talking
about freedom and the goals of the free software movement would not
appeal to business executives.  For more detail, you might read
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html.

| True. I think I'll change that to "partly closed source".

I still think it would be best to avoid the term "closed source" as
well.

| This is already the second part of my talk - I stressed these points
| enough in the first part (also posted to ML). This time I've been
| specifically asked by some students to give somewhat detailed
| comparison.
| My first talk was packed with sentences like "help is wanted here".
| The audience are teachers & students of numerical analysis, so I hope
| to attract them for doing some projects, probably as Master or PhD
| thesis.

OK.

Thanks,

jwe