I wouldn't reject something GPL, just because it's called "open source", instead of "free software". If something is both free and open-source, what about the term "foss"? That would appear to eliminate confusion; maybe it's redundant, if anything free is, by necessity, open-source? In my experience, the term "free software" is often confused with "freeware", where the latter is often a crippled version of a commercial product.



Reply via email to