Subject: Re: proprietary -- a truism
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 18:54:30 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> "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"?

I think we _do_ want some thing(s) with technicalities, mind you.  I
hope we don't end up with some ISO standard ;-), but one or more
certification processes are not such a bad idea.[1]


Footnotes: 
[1]  Even though today we have "free software" advocates taking
potshots at "open source software" advocates, and vice versa, and
internal squabbles in each camp, to the detriment of the community.
Even so.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
What are those two straight lines for?  "Free software rules."