3 ms·
From Wikipedia [1]: "In production and development, open source as a development model promotes a) universal access via free license to a product's design or b
by scribu 12y ago
From Wikipedia [1]:
"In production and development, open source as a development model promotes a) universal access via free license to a product's design or blueprint, and b) universal redistribution of that design or blueprint, including subsequent improvements to it by anyone"
So no, "open source" doesn't just mean being able to read the source code; it also means being able to modify and redistribute it, just like "free software". The difference between the two terms isn't very meaningful in practical terms, IMHO.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
- Tyr42 12y agoNo, there is a meaningful difference [1]. Free (as in freedom) Software guarantees that the end user can always get, modify, and redistribute the source, by requiring any use of the source code to be under the same license. In short, copyleft. For example [2], since linksys modified and extended GPL'd code (the linux kernel) in creating the WRT54G wireless router, they had to release their work under the GPL too, which is how to OpenWrt project was created. The term Open Source applies to projects with more permissive licenses, such as the MIT license, where there is not obligation to release your modified version of the source to the end user. [1]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.htm... [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenWrt#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenWrt#History