6 ms·
But here the source is open! Why should we restrict the meaning of Opel Source, a societal mouvement since decades, to a list of criteria that FSF or OSI decid
by josephernest 2y ago
But here the source is open!
Why should we restrict the meaning of Opel Source, a societal mouvement since decades, to a list of criteria that FSF or OSI decided?
Open source is not a trade mark by FSF or OSI.
OP did not say it is free/libre software, but just open source, which it is.
We don't need "source available", just open source is correct.
PS: can you define the open source body in your previous comment?
- emacsen 2y agoWhy should words like "organic" in relation to food mean without pesticides? I mean all carbon and water based life forms are organic, right? I can define Open Source easily, using the OSI definition. There is not a trademark for Open Source because they failed to secure the trademark, but we have decades of use for the term meaning something specific.