3 ms·

Well, there are references of "Open source" being in use earlier; for example: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32/WoBvPB

Well, there are references of "Open source" being in use earlier; for example: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32/WoBvPB0U9Co/wXfpq5nEJTYJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.os.ms-windows.pro... http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/fall96/0269.html http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/fall96/0269.html Especially that Caldera one seems pretty high profile. "Open source" has always been used as a generic term, because it's a very descriptive adjective+noun one. Trying to reserve such terms for one particular narrow usage seems like an fools' errand to me, which is why these discussion are being held all the time.

jordigh 7y ago
The Caldera one is always "open source-code", not "open-source code". The words happen to appear together but aren't being used with the same intent. I didn't know about the NT example. It's a new one to me. But it's also very isolated. I said "essentially nobody" not absolutely "no one". There are a few scattered and rare examples before 1998, but it was not common parlance and most people had never heard about "open source" before Tim O'Reilly bankrolled OSI.