4 ms·

Why are there no reminders here about the difference between open source and free (= libre) software ? It's specifically an important feature of libre software

Why are there no reminders here about the difference between open source and free (= libre) software ? It's specifically an important feature of libre software that others are free to resell or to make money from support of your own software : this is seen as a good thing because distribution (and support) are not free for the distributor (though I guess much less relevant in a world with widespread high speed Internet and peer to peer distribution software ?) (and supporter).

ghaff 4y ago
>Why are there no reminders here about the difference between open source and free (= libre) software Because there isn't a difference.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  Well, there is a difference. Open source software includes certain things that may not be included in libre software, such as access to source code, customer participation in development, etc.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    Open source can be different from "free as in beer" but certainly not different other than as a philosophical/marketing thing from "free as in freedom" as the FSF uses the libre term. I may generally prefer permissive licenses but I certainly don't see how the GPL, for example, doesn't enable access to source code--though it may sometimes discourage participation in development.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      I think "libre" means something different to me. All OSS is libre, but not all libre software is open source. For instance, freeware distributed solely in binary form is libre. But nobody taught me this definition. Not sure where I got it. So I could very well be wrong.
      - jraph 4y ago
        > For instance, freeware distributed solely in binary form is libre. Nope. That's free as in free beer. free/libre software / open source software is free as in free speech (and often as in free beer but not always) some people use the French/Spanish word libre in English to avoid this exact confusion caused by the world free having both meanings. free software and open source software are defined by the FSF and the OSI, respectively, but the definition are equivalent and designate the same set of software, essentially.
        JohnFen 4y ago
        Thanks for the correction. We sure could use a term for such software, though.
        bee_rider 4y ago
        I haven’t seen “freeware” used to describe Free software. Or, shareware seems like a pretty close idea to what you are describing?
simiones 4y ago
Why is this relevant in this context? The question is which entity should be liable for abiding by this regulation, and the clear intention is that the answer is the one that Stallman himself would agree with: responsibility should sit entirely with whoever is distributing the software and making money off of it.
amalcon 4y ago
That's not a fundamental feature of open source, or a fundamental restriction of free software. E.g the GPL is approved by OSI, and the MIT license is approved by the FSF. The distinction is really much more about philosophical objectives and marketing than it is about anything material.
roarcher 4y ago
Because Libre software is included under the umbrella of Open Source. If I'm writing an article about car regulations, I don't need to specifically mention cars with leather interiors unless the regulation treats them differently.

ghaff 4y ago

>Why are there no reminders here about the difference between open source and free (= libre) software Because there isn't a difference.

JohnFen 4y ago
Well, there is a difference. Open source software includes certain things that may not be included in libre software, such as access to source code, customer participation in development, etc.
- ghaff 4y ago
  Open source can be different from "free as in beer" but certainly not different other than as a philosophical/marketing thing from "free as in freedom" as the FSF uses the libre term. I may generally prefer permissive licenses but I certainly don't see how the GPL, for example, doesn't enable access to source code--though it may sometimes discourage participation in development.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    I think "libre" means something different to me. All OSS is libre, but not all libre software is open source. For instance, freeware distributed solely in binary form is libre. But nobody taught me this definition. Not sure where I got it. So I could very well be wrong.
    - jraph 4y ago
      > For instance, freeware distributed solely in binary form is libre. Nope. That's free as in free beer. free/libre software / open source software is free as in free speech (and often as in free beer but not always) some people use the French/Spanish word libre in English to avoid this exact confusion caused by the world free having both meanings. free software and open source software are defined by the FSF and the OSI, respectively, but the definition are equivalent and designate the same set of software, essentially.
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        Thanks for the correction. We sure could use a term for such software, though.
        bee_rider 4y ago
        I haven’t seen “freeware” used to describe Free software. Or, shareware seems like a pretty close idea to what you are describing?

simiones 4y ago

Why is this relevant in this context? The question is which entity should be liable for abiding by this regulation, and the clear intention is that the answer is the one that Stallman himself would agree with: responsibility should sit entirely with whoever is distributing the software and making money off of it.

amalcon 4y ago

That's not a fundamental feature of open source, or a fundamental restriction of free software. E.g the GPL is approved by OSI, and the MIT license is approved by the FSF. The distinction is really much more about philosophical objectives and marketing than it is about anything material.

roarcher 4y ago

Because Libre software is included under the umbrella of Open Source. If I'm writing an article about car regulations, I don't need to specifically mention cars with leather interiors unless the regulation treats them differently.