free, open-source software - Revision history

Woozle: libre; smw

2016-09-03T15:37:06Z

libre; smw

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:37, 3 September 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[~~Category~~:~~Computer Terminology~~]][[~~Computing~~]]: [[~~free, open-source software~~]]~~{{seed}}~~		<hide>
			[[page type::article]]
			[[thing type::terminology]]
			[[subject area::computing]]
			[[category:computer terminology]]
			</hide>
			==About==
	"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).		"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).

	"Costing nothing to obtain legally" is sometimes referred to as "free as in beer", and "free for additional copying and modifying" is often referred to as "free as in speech".		"Costing nothing to obtain legally" is sometimes referred to as "free as in beer", and "free for additional copying and modifying" is often referred to as "free as in speech" or "libre".
			{{seedling}}
	==Related Pages==		==Related Pages==
	* [[open format]]		* [[open format]]

Woozle: /* News */ need to create a page about ClamAV, so might as well link to it

2011-03-18T20:40:29Z

News: need to create a page about ClamAV, so might as well link to it

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:40, 18 March 2011
Line 17:		Line 17:

	==News==		==News==
	* '''2006-09-19''' [http://www.itjungle.com/fhs/fhs091906-story01.html Is Antivirus Ready for Open Source?]: focus on ClamAV antivirus software		* '''2006-09-19''' [http://www.itjungle.com/fhs/fhs091906-story01.html Is Antivirus Ready for Open Source?]: focus on [[ClamAV]] antivirus software
	* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).		* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).
	* '''2006-03-09''' [http://news.com.com/GPL+3.0+A+bonfire+of+the+vanities/2010-7344_3-6047707.html GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities?] ([http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot?m=4152 slashdot]) by Jonathan Zuck of the [[wikipedia:Association for Competitive Technology\|Association for Competitive Technology]] (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)		* '''2006-03-09''' [http://news.com.com/GPL+3.0+A+bonfire+of+the+vanities/2010-7344_3-6047707.html GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities?] ([http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot?m=4152 slashdot]) by Jonathan Zuck of the [[wikipedia:Association for Competitive Technology\|Association for Competitive Technology]] (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)
	* '''2006-02-23''' [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075-2051196,00.html Free software? You can't just give it away] ([http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/23/1330220 slashdot]): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters		* '''2006-02-23''' [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075-2051196,00.html Free software? You can't just give it away] ([http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/23/1330220 slashdot]): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters
	* '''2005-11-11''' [http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1643243&tid=31 Free Software's surprising sympathy with Catholic doctrine]		* '''2005-11-11''' [http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1643243&tid=31 Free Software's surprising sympathy with Catholic doctrine]

Woozle: Reverted edits by 198.165.21.154 (Talk); changed back to last version by Woozle

2007-10-12T18:09:57Z

Reverted edits by 198.165.21.154 (Talk); changed back to last version by Woozle

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:09, 12 October 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~bocladarel~~
	[[Category:Computer Terminology]][[Computing]]: [[free, open-source software]]{{seed}}		[[Category:Computer Terminology]][[Computing]]: [[free, open-source software]]{{seed}}
	"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).		"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).

198.165.21.154 at 22:58, 11 October 2007

2007-10-11T22:58:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:58, 11 October 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
			bocladarel
	[[Category:Computer Terminology]][[Computing]]: [[free, open-source software]]{{seed}}		[[Category:Computer Terminology]][[Computing]]: [[free, open-source software]]{{seed}}
	"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).		"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).

Woozle: /* Links */ related pages: open formmat, open hardware license

2007-03-02T19:23:11Z

Links: related pages: open formmat, open hardware license

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 2 March 2007
Line 3:		Line 3:

	"Costing nothing to obtain legally" is sometimes referred to as "free as in beer", and "free for additional copying and modifying" is often referred to as "free as in speech".		"Costing nothing to obtain legally" is sometimes referred to as "free as in beer", and "free for additional copying and modifying" is often referred to as "free as in speech".
			==Related Pages==
			* [[open format]]
			* [[open hardware]]
			** [http://www.tapr.org/OHL/ The TAPR Open Hardware License]
	==Links==		==Links==
	* [http://opensourceversus.com/ Open Source Versus]: comparisons of open-source and proprietary software		* [http://opensourceversus.com/ Open Source Versus]: comparisons of open-source and proprietary software
	* [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_09/philosophical_diff_fs/ Essay] by Tom Chance about the philosophical differences between "free", "open source", and "proprietary" software development		* [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_09/philosophical_diff_fs/ Essay] by Tom Chance about the philosophical differences between "free", "open source", and "proprietary" software development

	==Reference==		==Reference==
	* {{wikipedia\|Free and Open Source Software}}		* {{wikipedia\|Free and Open Source Software}}

Woozle: /* News */ is antivirus ready for open source?

2006-09-22T20:05:03Z

News: is antivirus ready for open source?

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:05, 22 September 2006
Line 12:		Line 12:

	==News==		==News==
			* '''2006-09-19''' [http://www.itjungle.com/fhs/fhs091906-story01.html Is Antivirus Ready for Open Source?]: focus on ClamAV antivirus software
	* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).		* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).
	* '''2006-03-09''' [http://news.com.com/GPL+3.0+A+bonfire+of+the+vanities/2010-7344_3-6047707.html GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities?] ([http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot?m=4152 slashdot]) by Jonathan Zuck of the [[wikipedia:Association for Competitive Technology\|Association for Competitive Technology]] (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)		* '''2006-03-09''' [http://news.com.com/GPL+3.0+A+bonfire+of+the+vanities/2010-7344_3-6047707.html GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities?] ([http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot?m=4152 slashdot]) by Jonathan Zuck of the [[wikipedia:Association for Competitive Technology\|Association for Competitive Technology]] (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)
	* '''2006-02-23''' [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075-2051196,00.html Free software? You can't just give it away] ([http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/23/1330220 slashdot]): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters		* '''2006-02-23''' [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075-2051196,00.html Free software? You can't just give it away] ([http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/23/1330220 slashdot]): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters
	* '''2005-11-11''' [http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1643243&tid=31 Free Software's surprising sympathy with Catholic doctrine]		* '''2005-11-11''' [http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1643243&tid=31 Free Software's surprising sympathy with Catholic doctrine]

Woozle: /* Reference */ ESR on open-source

2006-07-15T15:16:22Z

Reference: ESR on open-source

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 15 July 2006
Line 8:		Line 8:
	==Reference==		==Reference==
	* {{wikipedia\|Free and Open Source Software}}		* {{wikipedia\|Free and Open Source Software}}
			==Writings==
			* '''1998-02''' [http://www.catb.org/~esr/open-source.html Goodbye "free software"; hello, "open source"]: Eric S. Raymond's call to the community, issued immediately after the Netscape breakthrough, to start using the term "open source"

	==News==		==News==
	* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).		* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).

Woozle: updates due to name change; also free-as-in notes.

2006-05-28T23:25:22Z

updates due to name change; also free-as-in notes.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:25, 28 May 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Category:Computer Terminology]][[Computing]]: [[~~FOSS~~]]{{seed}}		[[Category:Computer Terminology]][[Computing]]: [[free, open-source software]]{{seed}}
	~~'''FOSS''': abbreviation for Free~~, ~~Open~~-~~Source Software. Indicates~~ software which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:~~Open_source~~\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).		"[[free, open-source software]]" is [[software]] which is not only [[WikiPedia:Free_software\|free]] (as in either "costing nothing to obtain legally" or as in "free for additional copying and modifying", depending on who you talk to) but also [[WikiPedia:Open-source software\|open source]] (meaning that the source code is available for modification and re-distribution).

			"Costing nothing to obtain legally" is sometimes referred to as "free as in beer", and "free for additional copying and modifying" is often referred to as "free as in speech".
	==Links==		==Links==
	* [http://opensourceversus.com/ Open Source Versus]: comparisons of open-source and proprietary software		* [http://opensourceversus.com/ Open Source Versus]: comparisons of open-source and proprietary software
	* [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_09/philosophical_diff_fs/ Essay] by Tom Chance about the philosophical differences between "free", "open source", and "proprietary" software development		* [http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_09/philosophical_diff_fs/ Essay] by Tom Chance about the philosophical differences between "free", "open source", and "proprietary" software development
	==Reference==		==Reference==
	* {{wikipedia\|~~FOSS~~}}		* {{wikipedia\|Free and Open Source Software}}
	==News==		==News==
	* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).		* '''2006-03-16''' [http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5624944 Open, but not as usual] ([http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/17/2125224 slashdot]): how "open source" ideas interact with the world of business. At least one fact in this article is incorrect: "Wikipedia changed its rules so that only registered users can edit existing entries." This is untrue (I was still able to edit a random article after logging out --[[User:Woozle\|Woozle]] 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).

Woozle: FOSS moved to free, open-source software

2006-05-28T23:19:42Z

FOSS moved to free, open-source software

← Older revision	Revision as of 23:19, 28 May 2006
(No difference)

Woozle: /* News */ newsforge article relating to Catholic doctrine

2006-05-15T17:54:53Z

News: newsforge article relating to Catholic doctrine

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:54, 15 May 2006
Line 10:		Line 10:
	* '''2006-03-09''' [http://news.com.com/GPL+3.0+A+bonfire+of+the+vanities/2010-7344_3-6047707.html GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities?] ([http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot?m=4152 slashdot]) by Jonathan Zuck of the [[wikipedia:Association for Competitive Technology\|Association for Competitive Technology]] (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)		* '''2006-03-09''' [http://news.com.com/GPL+3.0+A+bonfire+of+the+vanities/2010-7344_3-6047707.html GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities?] ([http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot?m=4152 slashdot]) by Jonathan Zuck of the [[wikipedia:Association for Competitive Technology\|Association for Competitive Technology]] (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)
	* '''2006-02-23''' [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075-2051196,00.html Free software? You can't just give it away] ([http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/23/1330220 slashdot]): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters		* '''2006-02-23''' [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075-2051196,00.html Free software? You can't just give it away] ([http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/23/1330220 slashdot]): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters
			* '''2005-11-11''' [http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1643243&tid=31 Free Software's surprising sympathy with Catholic doctrine]