Hi, Melissa Draper wrote:
I explain in the leaflet the difference between the two editions of 'free', but kept the 'open source' references so the readers would not have to double back and try figure which free was being talked about at the time.
Without wanting to start a religious war, I think it depends very much on the audience you're talking to. If I was talking to an audience of IT professionals who've been bombarded with the term "open source" for nearly ten years, and have not heard the term "free software" except in the sense of "zero cost" in all that time, I might be more inclined to use that as the "hook". But I've never quite understood the argument that says that to define the ambiguous term "free software", you have to introduce a totally new term, and then define that. Never mind that in doing so to a non-technical audience, you also have to explain what source code is. I agree that to a total newbie "open source" won't be taken to mean "zero cost", but I think that's because they have no way of even guessing at what the intended meaning is. I can't say I've had any particular problem explaining to people what I mean by the "free" in "free software"; that zero-cost software therefore isn't necessarily free; and that I make my living selling free software. A few borderline geeks here and there might say "Oh, you mean open source", to which I can say "yes", or if I've got enough time to elaborate "nearly, but not quite", but in talking to non-technical people I haven't seen any need for an alternative term. Then there is the fact that some prominent personalities who identify most strongly with the lable "open source" have spent most of a decade at least underplaying or at worst strenuously denying the fact that computer users' freedoms pose a significant ethical issue at all, which makes it (all else being equal) a less suitable term to use on Software Freedom Day. As the co-founder of the Open Source Initiative and principle author of the Open Source Definition has been saying for many years now: "It's time to talk about free software again" (http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/02/msg01641.html). I certainly wouldn't want to exclude people who identify with the term "open source", and I would no more indulge in public open-source-bashing on SFD than public Microsoft-bashing, but I think it's more important (in most circumstances) to put freedom up front and mention open source in passing than the other way around. Matthew. -- Alma Technology - The future is free and open http://www.almatech.net.au ... (02) 6658 1607 ... 0419 242 316 -- http://computerclub.cex.com.au http://www.clublinux.org.au -- Soyez réalistes, demandez l'impossible!