Linux.com

Everything these people say, think or do is inconsequential! This is not Vista we are talking about here!

#

I enjoyed the interview. But I could have done without the silly free software vs open source bit. That schism has always been quite artificial. Some people emphasize that it is a better way to develop software. Some people emphasize that the freedom is the important thing. I would say that it is a better way to develop software, in large part, due to the freedom... and that it being a better way to develop software has been a largely responsible for the success which free software has enjoyed.

free software and open source software are essentially the same thing. All the hair-splitting about how they are really different is inane.

#

Silly to you, perhaps, but it's a big deal to many developers who create or contribute to software projects that are important to Red Hat, including many of the company's own employees. Some of them have bent my ear at length over the difference and why it's important. Therefore, dealing with the difference between Open Source and Free Software -- and *knowing* that difference -- is important for Mr. Whitehurst in his new role as Red Hat CEO. That's why I asked him that question.

Thanks for caring,

- Robin

#

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.

#