Difference between revisions of "free, open-source software"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(libre; smw) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | <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]] | ||
| Line 18: | Line 24: | ||
==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] | ||
Latest revision as of 15:37, 3 September 2016
About
"free, open-source software" is software which is not only 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 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" or "libre".
Related Pages
Links
- Open Source Versus: comparisons of open-source and proprietary software
- Essay by Tom Chance about the philosophical differences between "free", "open source", and "proprietary" software development
Reference
Writings
- 1998-02 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
- 2006-09-19 Is Antivirus Ready for Open Source?: focus on ClamAV antivirus software
- 2006-03-16 Open, but not as usual (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 --Woozle 06:45, 28 April 2006 (EDT)).
- 2006-03-09 GPL 3.0: A bonfire of the vanities? (slashdot) by Jonathan Zuck of the Association for Competitive Technology (a more-or-less anti-open-source group)
- 2006-02-23 Free software? You can't just give it away (slashdot): apparently the freely-redistributable nature of FOSS causes confusion in some quarters
- 2005-11-11 Free Software's surprising sympathy with Catholic doctrine