[OSGeo-Discuss] "Free"

[Allan Doyle]

On Mar 5, 2007, at 13:26, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> ross s wrote:
>> Just to add a bit more spice to the discussion.  I think the root  
>> problem here is a definition amoung open source purists.  Jeff  
>> Thurston has added some interesting points to his blog (below).
>> ---
>> So? is your ?free? more pure than my ?free?? Is there a ?free-o- 
>> meter? or something about?
>
> Folks,
>
> Yes, there is a free-o-meter.  If the licensing of software  
> meetings the
> requirements of the open source definition then the software is  
> free (in
> the open source sense).  Otherwise it is just not.
>
> I have no problem with workshops about mixing free (aka open  
> source) and
> proprietary software.  Lots and lots of foss software works with  
> Oracle, so
> show that link in action!  But I don't feel the conference should have
> substantial content that is strictly proprietary without so much as an
> open source fig-leaf.
>
> The lack of understanding of what we mean by free just demonstrates  
> the
> need for additional outreach by OSGeo.

+1

See also: http://zcologia.com/news/390/deliberately-obtuse/

Free-o-meter: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html


-- 
Allan Doyle
+1.781.433.2695
adoyle at eogeo.org