Re: [DotGNU]PHILOSOPHY file

[Silvernerd]

Hi everybody,

here are some of my opinions about the discussion:

Daniel Carrera wrote:
 
> I think that it's a good idea, but I request that you not bash Open
> Source.  They are allies, not enemies.  Also, mention that Open Source
> SOFTWARE is the same as Free Software (the Open Source Definition is a
> copy of the Debian Free Software Guidelines).

I just wanted to say that I didn't intend by any means to bash Open
Source. Open Source is good, Free Software is good, but it is bad if
people don't know that there is a difference. Because then our
philosophy may be slowly forgotten and that is the reason for the
explicit and prominent distinction that I would like to place in the
Philosophy file. 
 
> RMS posted on this list just a while ago.  That email would be a good
> start for the PHILOSOPHY file.  I would only add a distinction between the
> ideologies and the software.

You are also right that Free Software and Open Source are the same on
the technical plane. That is actually one of the reason I have for
suggesting a Philosophy file. The Philosophy file could serve as a clear
distinction between Open Source and Free Software.

S11001001 wrote:
> 
> I would like to see a unifying document that explains the goals and values of
> the DotGNU project in a practical (and inspiring :) manner. If some people
> would like to do this, it would be greatly appreciated. Think modeling after
> the GNU Manifesto ;)

My thoughts exactly. Maybe it is possible to write a small Philosophy
file that contains only the most important points and ship it with the
programs and have a DotGNU manifesto that goes into the stuff at full
length on the website.

-- 
Silvernerd (Peter Minten)

"Using Linux is like walking over a ray of bricks, not as beautiful, but
a lot more substantial than light."