On Sat, 2013-05-11 at 12:49 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: > However, I see that Michael Hill also interpreted this as if the point > were about the word "gimp". Why was that?
For the same reason that you distracted from the main message of my post. I'll grant that I probably should be calling it "free software" rather than "open source." But the main message was not that we should call it one or the other, but that the GNOME community is extensively involved in accessibility software development and the use of "gimp", while its origins are logical, is not clear to all GNOME a11y users and the first impression is one of offense taken. So, keep the thread in its focus, on whether we should or shouldn't continue with the use of "gimp", and then if you feel it is worthy, start another thread on the semantic differences of "free software" and "open source" and educate us on that new thread. (Or sub-thread, if you will.) I think there's much to be debated on that topic as well, but if we did, we'd overrun this topic, which I consider to be important and worthy of discussion here. Bryen _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
