4 ms·
It is pedantry of the same kind as RMS insisting on using GNU/Linux name instead of Linux. I have several projects under GPL and MIT licenses, some are over 10
by huhtenberg 12y ago
It is pedantry of the same kind as RMS insisting on using GNU/Linux name instead of Linux. I have several projects under GPL and MIT licenses, some are over 10 years old, and I still think it's perfectly fine to describe something with publicly available code as "open source". Whether it is released under an open source license is another matter, and in many cases it's not, including TC and most of what Microsoft releases. But in conversational English TC is open source, because there's basically no other established term to describe the fact that its source is available. If you are aware of one, I'd like to know it.
- jordigh 12y agoStallman and his toe cheese have nothing to do with this. I think the term "visible source" is quite unambiguous, but perhaps I'm wrong. Microsoft prefers the term "shared source" for what you describe.