|
|
|
|
|
by syshum
1569 days ago
|
|
Open Source is made up by the organizations that represent Open Source. As such if the Organizations are hostile to Free Software, then Open Source is hostile, you can not separate the 2 like you are attempting Sure under a technical definition Open Source all Free Software is open source, however not all Open Source software is Free Software. That is the core of the problem, as we move forward in time, the amount of software that is "Open Source" while not being Free expands, not contracts. |
|
In my mind, it's only licenses and the software they're applied to, not organizations, that can be open source or not.
> Sure under a technical definition Open Source all Free Software is open source, however not all Open Source software is Free Software.
Neither category is a subset of the other. For example, SQLite is free software but not open source, because the Free Software Definition includes public domain software, but the Open Source Definition explicitly excludes it. And prior to Perl's adoption of the GPL, it was open source but not free software due to the Artistic License 1.0. Anyway, keep in mind that these examples are really rare, and that the vast majority of programs are either both or neither.
> That is the core of the problem, as we move forward in time, the amount of software that is "Open Source" while not being Free expands, not contracts.
I can't think of any programs in recent times that are open source but not free software. Do you know of any?