> Because FOSS is about community contributions. People contribute to something owned by the community for the good of the community. Absolutely not. This is n

> Because FOSS is about community contributions. People contribute to something owned by the community for the good of the community. Absolutely not. This is never what it meant. If you go back the Four Freedoms then it talks about "freedom to do with the software what I want", and certainly not about "software developed with a specific methodology" or "community contributions". The OSD says more or less the same, in a different way. Ask Richard Stallman: I'm 100% convinced he will tell you the same. It has ALWAYS been about giving users freedom about their own computers, never about "the greater good of the community" of anything else. The disagreement about the DSL is that the "use the software for any purpose"-freedom is breached. You can disagree if that's a big deal or not, and if that will or won't impede community contributions, but "you must accept community contributions" never played a part of that and never should play a part in that. I will quite literally take down every single one of my many free software projects if it ever becomes to mean that, and suspect many others will too. On a personal level YOU may think that this is important, and that's fine. But that's something different. Usually I would take this as a "I care about this" and not be too pedantic about exact meaning of "Free Software" or whatnot, but you're incredibly fastidious about the "correct usage of FOSS" all over this thread, it's a hugely painful that your understanding of what it even means is just factually incorrect.