I disagree.

The free software movement is attached to the users' freedoms. Not to the software. Its license is fundamental though: it must respect the four essential freedoms of the users. The way the program was developed does not matter at all.

On the contrary, the open source movement is attached to a development method (transparency, peer reviewing, etc.), which is supposed to generate software that is technically better. If not, open source proponents use proprietary software. The license of the software is not as fundamental to them: the open source movement criticizes free software whose development is done behind closed doors.

Like onpon4 wrote above, that basically is the difference between "free software" and "open source": A difference in the values that are defended, hence a fundamental difference.

Reply via email to