FAQ for giving lectures about Free Software

[MJ Ray]

Alex Hudson <home at alexhudson.com>
> "Open source", to me, focusses on the development method. [...]

The term and its promotion *confuses* the development method and
the licensing terms.  The Cathedral and the Bazaar is clearly
about development style, but the Open Source Definition(ugh)
makes no mention of it.

> > > Open Source is a term that was coined because the term 'free' in English
> > > is ambiguous.  
> 
> http://www.opensource.org/advocacy/free-notfree.php
> 
> It might be revisionist; I don't know - but the argument about the
> ambiguity was what I was always aware of.

I think it is revisionist.  The Open Source Initiative was an
initiative to secure a trademark which could be used to label
free software in a business-friendly way.  It failed, but OSI
marches on regardless like a zombie.  Open Source is not free
of ambiguity anyway: http://mjr.towers.org.uk/writing/ambigopen.html

"Open Source" need not have necessarily fared any better in
that meeting.  The number of times I've heard it misnamed as
"open software"... No, if the account director is an imprecise
moron, you're screwed any road.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray - personal email, see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Work: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/  irc.oftc.net/slef  Jabber/SIP ask