• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    FOSS open source

    There is no world in which crossing one of those terms out to replace it with the other is valid and not disinformation.

    “Free Software” is defined by GNU. “Open Source” is defined by the Open Source Initiative. Those are the only valid definitions of those terms of art.

    They may differ in tone and emphasis, but they are compatible: every piece of code that can validly be described as “Free Software” can also be described as “Open Source,” and vice-versa. The notion that there exists code which is “Open Source” but not “Free Software” is false, and anyone pretending that there is such a distinction (e.g. Microsoft’s past attempt at promoting “shared source”) is either misled himself or trying to mislead.

    I’m not trying to accuse you of anything, but I just want to make sure we’re all clear on that point.

    • jaybone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m a bit confused here.

      I used to work for a company that published the source code for one of their products. I.e. made it publicly available.

      But many of the build tools and build infrastructure were proprietary and internal (not published publicly.)

      So I’d say that was open source but not free, since you can’t really build and run it.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Publishing source code is not sufficient to make something “Open Source.” Your company’s thing was better described as “proprietary with source code available.”

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, he doesn’t. That document supports my argument, not yours:

        The two now describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values.