On Dienstag, 3. Februar 2009, [email protected] wrote: > Well, I also speak about free software, but I also speak about open > source. I agree that free software is better, and it is my first > choice, but if I cannot have this freedom and I am given only "open > source" then I am practical and I use that as well.
I was criticising _how_ you have used "open source".
You did use it in a way that people will falsely let to me believe that
it those might be different states for one piece of software, which is wrong.
I consider it okay to start where people stand, using the terms they know,
and then go to a better explained state.
Usually I use it like
Free Software (another word for it is "Open Source") is good for society
and business.
Or
Free Software (some say "Open Source") will foster equal chances in
education
Maybe
Free Software (Open Source) is good for science because someone can
try to falsify the results and learn from how the other have done it.
But "apples, les pommes and äpfel" let me believe there are three different
kind of fuits on the table. Personally I even find this worse than
using "Open Source" consitantly. If you would do that, at least you were
clear about what it is which is a precondition for telling anybody - and
other people would understand me criticising you for this choice as Free
Software is much more instructive.
Best,
Bernhard
--
FSFE -- Coordinator Germany (fsfeurope.org)
Your donation makes our work possible: www.fsfeurope.org/help/donate.en.html
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
