Subject: Re: Of Interest
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG,>
From: None <>
List: current-users
Date: 07/22/1998 08:55:29
     There is much ambiguity concerning the terms open source and free=20
     software=2E  http://www=2Eopensource=2Ecom has a definition that inclu=
     GPL and BSD licenses as open source licenses=2E  I wonder what=20
     definition of open source the fsf is referring to on their web page=2E=2E=2E

______________________________ Reply Separator ____________________________=
Subject: Of Interest
Author:  MIME:brett@lariat=2Eorg at INTERNETALFALAVAL
Date:    1998-07-22 01:30

O'Reilly and Associates has just announced an "Open Source Town=20
Hall" meeting, to be held on the West Coast next month=2E The=20
official announcement is at
However, the speakers were not notified in advance that attendees=20
would be asked to pay a $10 admission fee, which would be donated=20
to=2E=2E=2E the Free Software Foundation=2E They found out only this mornin=
when the public announcement was made, and some (especially those from=20
the Apache and various BSD groups) were quite stunned by the=20
It's ironic that O'Reilly would do such a thing, since FSF opposes=20
the concept of "Open Source;" in fact, it openly and repeatedly=20
denigrates it on its Web site=2E See:
Since the Free Software Foundation does not support the concept
of "Open Source," it is antithetical to the purpose of an "Open Source"=20
conference to force attendees to contribute money to it=2E This is a major=20
faux pas for which O'Reilly should be remonstrated soundly=2E
I think that those who publish "Open Source" but do not share the FSF's=20
quasi-religious belief in the GNU Public License should point this out=20
to O'Reilly=2E Good contacts include Tim O'Reilly (tim@oreilly=2Ecom) and=20
Sara Winge, the publicity person (sara@oreilly=2Ecom)=2E