|
@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ |
|
|
|
|
|
Last week for HFOSS(Humanitarian Free and Open Source Software IGME-582) at RIT I |
|
|
|
|
|
was introduced to three articles that pick apart the differences between |
|
|
|
|
|
"Free Software" and "Open Source Software" or "FOSS" and "FLOSS". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- [How I coined the term 'open source' by Christine Peterson](https://opensource.com/article/18/2/coining-term-open-source-software) |
|
|
|
|
|
- [When Free Software Isn't (Practically) Superior by Benjamin Mako Hill](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/when-free-software-isnt-practically-superior.html) |
|
|
|
|
|
- [Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software by Richard Stallman](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peterson's article discussed how she ended up coining the term Open Source and how |
|
|
|
|
|
that term ended up becoming widely used. She explained that Open Source software |
|
|
|
|
|
was a new word for Free Software that was used instead because it would be more |
|
|
|
|
|
friendly with businesses. At that time(and still to this point) Free software is |
|
|
|
|
|
confused with software that you can get at no cost. Free Software is really free |
|
|
|
|
|
as in speech rather than free as in beer. Peterson's phrase "Open Source" |
|
|
|
|
|
gained a foot hold with larger communities and businesses because it focused on |
|
|
|
|
|
the practical benefits of doing software development in a public manner. Open Source |
|
|
|
|
|
software focused on collaboration and how building software in the public could |
|
|
|
|
|
improve security -- this really enticed businesses. To this day we see that |
|
|
|
|
|
businesses like Microsoft latch on to the phrase Open Source. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
//todo image of microsoft hearts open source |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With this divide in phrasing, there was a ideological split as well. People like |
|
|
|
|
|
Stallman in the Free Software camp felt like the Open Source movement lacks integrity |
|
|
|
|
|
because they don't focus on Freedom like they do. In his article "Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software", |
|
|
|
|
|
Stallman scarfs at the fact that some open source Linux distributions would offer the option |
|
|
|
|
|
to package proprietary(non-free) software. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Hill's article he echoes the views of Stallman's article, however, he points out |
|
|
|
|
|
that in practice Free Software isn't doing "better" than Open Source Software. |
|
|
|
|
|
The median number of contributors to a SourceForge free software project is one. |
|
|
|
|
|
The large success of Open Source Software is large in due to the fact that it is |
|
|
|
|
|
able to draw in more developers and retain financial support from companies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Despite the large overlap between Open Source software and Free Software, there |
|
|
|
|
|
are a few key distinctions. At a high level you can say that Free Software favors freedom, |
|
|
|
|
|
however, that is putting it in a very vague notion that can be interpreted in many ways. |
|
|
|
|
|
You could also put it in terms of the four R's of Free Software: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Read |
|
|
|
|
|
- Run |
|
|
|
|
|
- Repurpose |
|
|
|
|
|
- Redistribute |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However, I like to analyze the differences between FOSS and FLOSS by looking at license types |
|
|
|
|
|
that they use. |