Subject: Re: proprietary -- a truism
From: "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 16:56:11 +0000

"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "Ben" == Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk> writes:

>     Ben> Brian Bartholomew wrote:
>     >> I would rather the term 'free software' be reserved for those
>     >> things which are truly managed as donations to the world.  Some
>     >> other term should be invented for things which are mostly free.
> 
>     Ben> Like "open source", for example?
> 
> Well, yes, except that that can be confused with Open Source[tm].  We
> need something with more elasticity to it, that can be applied to
> pieces of a whole in a convenient way, and according to spirit as well
> as technicalities.  Maybe "published source"?

Another term I've used is "source distributed", which I use to describe
software for which source is available, at least to some users under
some terms, but isn't necessarily modifiable or redistributable.  Sun
releases Solaris source under terms I'd consider to be 'source
distributed', but neither "free software" nor "Open Source [tm]".  Need
arose during a discussion of security and source code (Louis Mettler
flamefest, carried out on a number of fora).

-- 
Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com)

    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    Welchen Teil von "Gestalt" verstehen Sie nicht?

web:       http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
SAS/Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html    

  9:03am  up 9 days,  7:07,  9 users,  load average: 0.61, 0.46, 0.48