On Mon, Jan 18, 1999 at 03:13:09PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously David Welton wrote: > > Well, even if RMS doesn't care for it, you can pull out the Open > > Source definition, which is definitive and specific, and generally > > used as the benchmark for what 'free' is. > > You do know the OS definition is the same as the current DFSG, right?
Maybe I haven't been that vocal or active, but I have been around since hrmm.. sometime mid '97 :-> So, of course I realize this, but sometimes, saying Open Source is just more convenient - they just can't argue with you (this thread ... :-) because their code is not Open Source, period. Given the value I place on my time, I dislike wasting it arguing about what 'free' really is, whether it is right that we appropriate it, etc.. (of course, I think Debian should continue to use 'free' exactly as we have done.) Ciao, -- David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
