[Koha-devel] Open Source or Free Software?

[Chris Cormack]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 12:44:02AM -1100, MJ Ray said:
> On 2003-04-22 12:12:17 +0100 Chris Cormack <chris at katipo.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> >In this case Rachel was meaning Free as in free beer.
> 
> OK, fair enough, but that's not free software, as was being discussed.

Yep, which kinda demonstrates one of the weaknesses in the term free software.
As you say below, its all about the explanation, not the term :)

[snip]

> >Having said that, as I said before I refer to Koha as Free Software, 
> >or Open
> >Source, depending on who im talking to. Which I think is the best 
> >solution.
> 
> I disagree, as you've probably gathered.  ;-)  Very few non-specialist 
> audiences understand either term, so an explanation is useful and I go 
> for the clearest simplest explanation, honed over 20 years.

Ahh yeah, but if I was describing Koha to a Maori audience, id use the term Koha,
a concept honed over thousands of years :-)

> 
> >As long as people understand its licensed under the GPL and what that
> >entails .. i dont really mind what its called :-)
> 
> Well, yes, the important thing is the concept, not the brand, isn't 
> it?  I agree entirely, so suggest that people reject the brand-as-king 
> "Open Source" term.
> 
This would be worth putting on the agenda. How do people want to describe
Koha on the koha.org site. But having said that, I think that people should
be free to describe it however they want to describe it.
So you can call it Free Software, I can call it Koha, Rachel can call it
Open Source, and as long as people keep commiting to cvs ... the project
keeps on going :-)

Chris


-- 
Chris Cormack                                                     Programmer
027 4500 789                                       Katipo Communications Ltd
chris at katipo.co.nz                                          www.katipo.co.nz