--- Frank Cox <theatre@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:24:35 +0800 > Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > OK... By that I take it there is no one > universally accepted definition of > > those terms. Otherwise, there would be no need > for all the different > > flavors of the "free" licenses. GPLv2, GPLv3, > FreeBSD, etc... > > Each one of those licenses serves a particular > purpose or need. (Whether each > one is actually required is a different question.) > > With regard to Free Software in particular, in the > modern computer industry, > the generally accepted definition of Free Software > (notice the capitalization) > is the definition that is provided and promoted by > the Free Software > Foundation. Which is what I sent you to see. > > It's a kind of an "industry standard definition", > for lack of a better term. > > Many industrial trades, for example, use otherwise > common terms that mean > something "special" in terms of their specific > industry. Free Software is a > good example of an otherwise common term that has a > special meaning in the > computer industry. > > -- > MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ > http://www.melvilletheatre.com > > -- Users are invited to look at the following pages for more resources/to gain a better understanding of the meanings of Open Source: Open Source page: http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd Licenses by Category: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/category Regards, Antonio __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
