Linux.com

In my opinion, the difference is largely contrived. The Free vs Open Source is largely the stuff of dinner time philosophy discussions. I see little practical, real world, difference in how a successful FOSS software company would act depending upon which term was used internally. They are a corporation, and want to be successful so they cannot ignore the practical advantages of FOSS as a developement model. They also cannot ignore the fact the many of those practical advantages derive, directly or indirectly, from the freedom. Most people actually have a foot in both camps, and I have *always* felt it was silly to separate the two.

Back when the Open Source term was first coined, I was happy to see someone working on a view of Free software which the more practical and pragmatic could grasp. As Bruce Perens just reiterated in his state of FOSS report, OSS was never intended as anything but another way to talk about free software. And one which might sway some people who would not be convinced by a lot of ivory tower talk about Freedom. Richard Stallman immediately set out to drive a wedge between into what was, at the time, really just one community. He did everything that he could to polarize the issue, and divide the community. And he is a very tenacious and determined fellow. He got the schism he desired, alright. The result has been continued hard feelings between community members and a perception by some that we are not all on the same team.

The FS vs OSS has been an unfortunate, and damaging thing. And I always try to do my part to expose it for the poisonous fiction that it is.

#