4 ms·
Most of the tools I used to learn to program would not qualify as Free Software by RMS's own definition. Most of these were Open Source.
by lightyrs 15y ago
Most of the tools I used to learn to program would not qualify as Free Software by RMS's own definition. Most of these were Open Source.
- caf 15y agoPerhaps you are not aware that the vast majority of open source software does qualify as Free Software by the FSF's definition. Certainly BSD-licensed software does.
- lightyrs 15y agoThe vast majority of tools I used to learn how to program were not Free Software as defined by RMS.
- paradoja 15y agoBut were OSS? An example, please?
- cube13 15y agoBSD as it currently is(the "new" BSD licenses from 1999 on), because that's GPL compatible. The original BSD license does not count as FOSS as far as the FSF is concerned.
- candeira 15y agoThe original BSD license was free too, it was just not GPL compatible. The FSF has always recommended against it, but they have always called it a Free Software license. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#OriginalBSD http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#OriginalBSD
- icebraining 15y agoI very much doubt that, since the definitions are very similar. Just because you could look at the source doesn't make it Open Source, as defined by the OSI.
- lightyrs 15y agoThe vast majority of tools I used to learn how to program were not Free Software as defined by RMS.
- lightyrs 15y agoAgain, the vast majority of tools I used to learn how to program were not Free Software as defined by RMS.
- icebraining 15y agoI don't doubt that. I find it hard to believe they were Open Source.