[Eliah_Lakhin]

Using the term "open source" for every project published in source code form might not be ideal — not just because of the "zealots", but also because it may not serve the author’s best interests.

The term "open source" has a well-established reputation as "free as in beer", whether we like it or not. So why attach such a label to a commercial product?

Commercial software isn't inherently a bad thing. In fact, it's even better if the author or business can afford to publish it in source code form, making their services more transparent to end users.

As for the term "source available", it isn't as well-established as "open source". Its meaning may not be clear to the audience, and there's a certain lack of trust associated with it. However, this could change over time if more projects identify as "source available" and maintain clear and honest distribution and usage policies.