undefined | Better HN

0 pointsNaac5y ago0 comments

>> The phrase was hijacked (by the OSI) and is being squatted on by people who want to enforce a very specific meaning of the phrase, even though it is self-descriptive and broad

I'm not sure that's a very generous interpretation.

In our industry these terms have very specific meanings. Just like other words in Physics, Law, or Medicine have very specific meanings to those in the field, but not to outsiders.

When we say Open Source, we use a two-word description to describe a much broader idea. Likewise when we say Free/Libre Software, we describe software licensed under specific conditions. Its obvious for us in this field why Google Chrome is not Free Software, but not so much for the average person.

>> OSS should be an umbrella phrase that covers the multitude of interpretations like source available, FOSS, FLOSS, etc.

I understand where you're coming from, but unfortunately OSS already has a strict definition. I agree there is a need for a more correct categorization, but it should be strictly and nomenclaturally separate from Open Source, to show that it is a much more restrictive license.

0 comments

sbauch5y ago

The other industries you mention have gone through similar changes though haven't they? Not long ago, "idiot", "imbecile" and "moron" were all terms with strict definitions in the field of medicine. Languages, terms that are strictly defined, even terms that are particular to a science or industry, evolve over time.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse