[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Open Source Software - Proposal (fwd)
Forwarded message:
>From [email protected] Tue Feb 10 10:35:27 1998
From: Jim Choate <[email protected]>
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Subject: Open Source Software - Proposal
To: [email protected] (SSZ User Mail List)
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 1998 10:35:25 -0600 (CST)
Cc: [email protected] (Ravage's Friends), [email protected]
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 3835
Forwarded message:
> X-within-URL: http://earthspace.net/~esr/open-source.html
>
> GOODBYE, "FREE SOFTWARE"; HELLO, "OPEN SOURCE"
>
> After the Netscape announcement broke in February early 1998 I did a
> lot of thinking about the next phase -- the serious push to get "free
> software" accepted in mainstream corporate America. And I realized we
> have a serious problem with "free software" itself.
>
> Specifically, we have a problem with the term "free software", itself,
> not the concept. I've become convinced that the term has to go.
>
> The problem with it is twofold. First, it's confusing; the term "free"
> is very ambiguous (something the Free Software Foundation's propaganda
> has to wrestle with constantly). Does "free" mean "no money charged?"
> or does it mean "free to be modified by anyone", or something else?
>
> Second, the term makes a lot of corporate types nervous. While this
> does not intrinsically bother me in the least, we now have a pragmatic
> interest in converting these people rather than thumbing our noses at
> them. There's now a chance we can make serious gains in the mainstream
> business world without compromising our ideals and commitment to
> technical excellence -- so it's time to reposition. We need a new and
> better label.
>
> I brainstormed this with some Silicon Valley fans of Linux the day
> after my meeting with Netscape (Feb 5th). We kicked around and
> discarded several alternatives, and we came up with a replacement
> label we all liked: "open source".
>
> John "maddog" Hall and Larry Augustin, both of the Linux International
> Board of Directors, were in on the brainstorming session (though
> interestingly enough the term "open source" was suggested by
> non-hacker Chris Peterson, observing for the Foresight Institute).
> Linus Torvalds himself approved it the following day. And it isn't a
> Linux-only thing; Keith Bostic likes it and says he thinks the BSD
> community can be brought on board.
>
> We suggest that everywhere we as a culture have previously talked
> about "free software", the label should be changed to "open source".
> Open-source software. The open-source model. The open source culture.
> The Debian Open Source Guidelines. (In pitching this to corporate
> America I'm also going to be invoking the idea of "peer review" a
> lot.)
>
> Bruce Perens has volunteered to register "open source" as a trademark
> and hold it through Software in the Public Interest. And RMS himself
> has said he'll use the term (though not exclusively) as long as the
> Open Source Definition Bruce is working up isn't weaker than the
> Debian Free Software Guidelines.
>
> And, we should explain publicly the reason for the change. Linus has
> been saying in "World Domination 101" that the open-source culture
> needs to make a serious effort to take the desktop and engage the
> corporate mainstream. Of course he's right -- and this re-labeling, as
> Linus agrees, is part of the process. It says we're willing to work
> with and co-opt the market for our own purposes, rather than remaining
> stuck in a marginal, adversarial position.
>
> It's crunch time, people. The Netscape announcement changes
> everything. We've broken out of the little corner we've been in for
> twenty years. We're in a whole new game now, a bigger and more
> exciting one -- and one I think we can win.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> Back to Eric's Home Page Up to Site Map $Date: 1998/02/10 03:55:36 $
>
>
> Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]>
>