4 ms·

"back before free software was renamed to open source in 1998" That's an interesting reading of history, and one that the creators of the terms "free software"

by kensey 9y ago

"back before free software was renamed to open source in 1998" That's an interesting reading of history, and one that the creators of the terms "free software" and "open source" would probably both vigorously dispute.

jordigh 9y ago
The creators of both terms agree. I asked them: http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/5-things-we-have-forgotten-about-open-source/ http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/5-things-we-have-forgot... And here: https://opensource.org/faq#free-software https://opensource.org/faq#free-software
- kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
  The "creators" are interested in securing their legacy. The term "open source" was in use before OSI got in the game: 1996: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/no.linux/1UZo-3iv0tM/XPrPljdFk6gJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/no.linux/1UZo-3iv0tM/XPrPljd... 1995: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.graphics.raytracing/6oZasTgNo1A/Vv2qZq-Ha4sJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.graphics.raytracing/6oZ...
  - jordigh 9y ago
    Both of those say "open source code". It's not a phrase like "open source" alone. The emphasis is on "source code" not on "open source". While it sounds pretty brain-dead to put "open" in front of anything, to the point that it seems like the most natural thing for it, most people did not use this term and there was very little widespread understanding of what "open source" meant. If it wasn't for OSI, we'd still be saying a bunch of disjointed things instead of being universally aware of something called "open source". Every time I have this discussion, someone comes along and thinks, "wait a minute, there's no way that OSI coined that term", but yes, they did. This is probably a Mandela effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandela_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandela_effect
    - kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
      You missed the hyphen in Caldera's "open-source", clearly linking them into a single term.
      - jordigh 9y ago
        Well then. I guess you found the one instance of it happening. It was very rare and essentially unheard of.
- kensey 9y ago
  Sure, OSI has an official doctrine, and Perens has (or had) kind of a unique point of view within that, about the two terms being fully synonymous -- but he partly walked back that view later, and Stallman and FSF's has historically been very different: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.... And especially: "The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement.... Most discussion of 'open source' pays no attention to right and wrong, only to popularity and success..." And of course OSI officially wrote "We realized it was time to dump the confrontational attitude that has been associated with 'free software' in the past and sell the idea strictly on the same pragmatic, business-case grounds that motivated Netscape." (http://web.archive.org/web/19981206185148/http://www.opensource.org/history.html http://web.archive.org/web/19981206185148/http://www.opensou...) In other words, "open source" was about depoliticizing "free software" to make it more commercially palatable. (And arguably, it worked.)
  - jordigh 9y ago
    Yep. It's a rebranding. And it worked. Kind of like machine learning instead of statistics.

by kensey 9y ago

jordigh 9y ago

The creators of both terms agree. I asked them: http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/5-things-we-have-forgotten-about-open-source/ http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/5-things-we-have-forgot... And here: https://opensource.org/faq#free-software https://opensource.org/faq#free-software

kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
The "creators" are interested in securing their legacy. The term "open source" was in use before OSI got in the game: 1996: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/no.linux/1UZo-3iv0tM/XPrPljdFk6gJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/no.linux/1UZo-3iv0tM/XPrPljd... 1995: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.graphics.raytracing/6oZasTgNo1A/Vv2qZq-Ha4sJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.graphics.raytracing/6oZ...
- jordigh 9y ago
  Both of those say "open source code". It's not a phrase like "open source" alone. The emphasis is on "source code" not on "open source". While it sounds pretty brain-dead to put "open" in front of anything, to the point that it seems like the most natural thing for it, most people did not use this term and there was very little widespread understanding of what "open source" meant. If it wasn't for OSI, we'd still be saying a bunch of disjointed things instead of being universally aware of something called "open source". Every time I have this discussion, someone comes along and thinks, "wait a minute, there's no way that OSI coined that term", but yes, they did. This is probably a Mandela effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandela_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandela_effect
  - kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
    You missed the hyphen in Caldera's "open-source", clearly linking them into a single term.
    - jordigh 9y ago
      Well then. I guess you found the one instance of it happening. It was very rare and essentially unheard of.
kensey 9y ago
Sure, OSI has an official doctrine, and Perens has (or had) kind of a unique point of view within that, about the two terms being fully synonymous -- but he partly walked back that view later, and Stallman and FSF's has historically been very different: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.... And especially: "The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement.... Most discussion of 'open source' pays no attention to right and wrong, only to popularity and success..." And of course OSI officially wrote "We realized it was time to dump the confrontational attitude that has been associated with 'free software' in the past and sell the idea strictly on the same pragmatic, business-case grounds that motivated Netscape." (http://web.archive.org/web/19981206185148/http://www.opensource.org/history.html http://web.archive.org/web/19981206185148/http://www.opensou...) In other words, "open source" was about depoliticizing "free software" to make it more commercially palatable. (And arguably, it worked.)
- jordigh 9y ago
  Yep. It's a rebranding. And it worked. Kind of like machine learning instead of statistics.