[OSGeo-Discuss] "Free"

[Arnulf Christl]

On Mon, March 5, 2007 19:26, Allan Doyle wrote:
>
> 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

+1 to both my humble masters who always find the right few words to
formulate what me needs to make an epic of.