Eirikur Hallgrimsson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> was free in 'every rational sense of the word.' He forgets that the FSF,
> did, in fact, define the term Free Software. In 1983. Sticking to their
> definition does not do them discredit.
The FSF can't have defined the term "free software", that's a way too
general term to take over. That'd be like saying that the company I
work for defines what a "digital creation" is. That's why we still
have to explicitly say this is "free-speech software" or "free-beer
software", and we always will. That also seems to be what the author
is saying. You can argue that KDE's freeness, or BSD or Artistic or
ZPL's freeness etc., aren't free enough, but I call them all free
software, if not FSF-Approved Free Software.
-- Karl Anderson email@example.com http://www.monkey.org/~kra/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 08:04:39 PDT