4 ms·

What is, in essence, the real difference between free and open source?

by macco 16y ago

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- macco 16y ago
  Open-source is free as in beer?
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
stilist 16y ago
I think Free Software requires any changes to be provided under the original license, while open source just means the source code is available for modification and optional distribution.
michael_dorfman 16y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Open_source_software_vs._free_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Open_sourc...
jdub 16y ago
Methodology (open source) vs. ideology (the morals and ethics of software freedom). Although some see them as opposing forces within a similar frame of interest, I see them as two sides of the same coin, and am deeply passionate about both.
Mithrandir 16y ago
Open source (or should I say, the catchphrase open-source) lets you "see" the source code, but not use it. It's more loose than: Free software (some call it "libre") lets you see and use the source code. Proprietary does not let you do either. Some software makers call their software "open-source" when it's really free, and some call their software "free" when it's really just "open". http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
- gaius 16y ago
  By that definition SAP is open source! Since you get all the ABAP code and can do whatever you want with it, if you buy SAP first...
- cmsj 16y ago
  I wouldn't agree with "but not use it". I tend to explain the difference as being that Open Source places the freedom of people first (e.g. with a BSD licence, developers have freedom to do anything with a piece of code) and Free Software places the freedom of software first. (I don't project any moral judgement of either of these goals, I think they both have their place. Also hi! ;)
- FooBarWidget 16y ago
  That's nonsense. Open source is defined by the Open Source Definition as published by the OSI. http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd Read section 3, Derived Works. Putting a source tarball online with a license that says "you can read this source but you can't do anything else with it" doesn't make it open source.
  - Mithrandir 16y ago
    I was talking about the catchphrase "open-source", not what the OSI talks about. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html

What is, in essence, the real difference between free and open source?

by macco 16y ago

What is, in essence, the real difference between free and open source?

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

macco 16y ago
Open-source is free as in beer?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

stilist 16y ago

I think Free Software requires any changes to be provided under the original license, while open source just means the source code is available for modification and optional distribution.

michael_dorfman 16y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Open_source_software_vs._free_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Open_sourc...

jdub 16y ago

Methodology (open source) vs. ideology (the morals and ethics of software freedom). Although some see them as opposing forces within a similar frame of interest, I see them as two sides of the same coin, and am deeply passionate about both.

Mithrandir 16y ago

Open source (or should I say, the catchphrase open-source) lets you "see" the source code, but not use it. It's more loose than: Free software (some call it "libre") lets you see and use the source code. Proprietary does not let you do either. Some software makers call their software "open-source" when it's really free, and some call their software "free" when it's really just "open". http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

gaius 16y ago
By that definition SAP is open source! Since you get all the ABAP code and can do whatever you want with it, if you buy SAP first...
cmsj 16y ago
I wouldn't agree with "but not use it". I tend to explain the difference as being that Open Source places the freedom of people first (e.g. with a BSD licence, developers have freedom to do anything with a piece of code) and Free Software places the freedom of software first. (I don't project any moral judgement of either of these goals, I think they both have their place. Also hi! ;)
FooBarWidget 16y ago
That's nonsense. Open source is defined by the Open Source Definition as published by the OSI. http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd Read section 3, Derived Works. Putting a source tarball online with a license that says "you can read this source but you can't do anything else with it" doesn't make it open source.
- Mithrandir 16y ago
  I was talking about the catchphrase "open-source", not what the OSI talks about. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html