There basically is no *practical* difference between "free software" and
"open source". Even rms tells it:
As far as we know, all existing free software would qualify as open source.
Nearly all open source software is free software, but there are exceptions.
The exceptions are a handful unpopular licenses... and, obviously (given its
mere name), the GNU LGPL is not among them! It is copyrighted by the Free
Software Foundation! You do not need to be good at English to read the three
first lines of the license:
GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 3, 29 June 2007
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
The (essential) difference between the two terms is to be found in the values
pushed by the people using one term or the other: "free software" is about
respecting the users' essential freedoms, whereas the term "open source" was
specifically coined to not talk about ethical issues. Anyway, as rms tells
"nearly all open source software is free software". The enemy is not the open
source software! It is the proprietary software.
Now would you please stop insulting users of this forum?
