[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: octave presentation, part 2
From: |
Ben Abbott |
Subject: |
Re: octave presentation, part 2 |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:56:03 -0500 |
On Thursday, November 20, 2008, at 08:08AM, "John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>
wrote:
>On 20-Nov-2008, Ben Abbott wrote:
>
>| I would think a simple rewording to "open source-code" would be
>| sufficient to dodge the issue, no?
>
>What issue are you trying to dodge?
Appartently the one I now find myself engaged in ;-)
>Part of agreeing to make Octave an "official" GNU project is promoting
>the ideals of the GNU project. You are free to use the terms you
>prefer, but we should not use terms like "open source" in the Octave
>documentation, and I'm asking you to consider saying "free software"
>instead when speaking about Octave.
>
>jwe
>
Personally, I don't think the term "free software" conveys sufficient context
to an audience of potential users. Describing software as free does not convey
that the source-code is open.
In any event, I find such ideological discussions demotivating and now regret
having offered an opinion at all. I'll try to avoid such going forward ... back
to keeping my head down ;-)
Ben
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, (continued)
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, John W. Eaton, 2008/11/19
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso, 2008/11/19
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, John W. Eaton, 2008/11/19
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, David Bateman, 2008/11/20
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, Ben Abbott, 2008/11/20
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, John W. Eaton, 2008/11/20
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, Przemek Klosowski, 2008/11/20
- Re: octave presentation, part 2, Jaroslav Hajek, 2008/11/20
Re: octave presentation, part 2, Ben Abbott, 2008/11/19
Re: octave presentation, part 2,
Ben Abbott <=