[OT] RE: [Israel.pm] Are we open source advocates ?
oron at actcom.co.il
Sun Jan 4 05:34:29 PST 2004
On Sunday 04 January 2004 14:35, Offer Kaye wrote:
> But just because Perl uses by default the Artistic License does not make it
> any less open-source. It does perhaps make it less *free*, as in the
> definition given by the GNU Foundation, but we were talking about
> Open-Source Software here, not Free Software.
A common confusion: Open-Source-Software and Free-Software defines the
same class of software. They both give you the rights to:
- Use for any purpose
- Distribute for any purpose
- Modify and redistribute modification for any purpose
- Create derived work for any purpose
The only difference is in ideology (or advocacy if you want):
- Free: because freedom (liberty) matters.
- OSS: because it "get the job done" better.
So, like you said, maybe Baird is unknowningly an OSS advocate ("perl
is exceptional"), but definitely not a Free-Software advocate.
(otherwise a good and clear replay)
Oron Peled Voice/Fax: +972-4-8228492
oron at actcom.co.il http://www.actcom.co.il/~oron
"We continue to live in a world where all our know-how is locked into
binary files in an unknown format. If our documents are our corporate
memory, Microsoft still has us all condemned to Alzheimer's."
-- Simon Phipps
More information about the Perl