R: Re: R: [PLUTO-soci] [alberanid a libero.it: [Discussioni] lettera a deputati e senatori]

[Alberto Cammozzo]

On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 06:40:19PM +0100, g_zucchetta a virgilio.it wrote:
> ----Messaggio originale----
> Da: mmzz a stat.unipd.it
> Data: 24-giu-2006 
> 16.46
> A: <pluto-soci a lists.pluto.it>
> Ogg: Re: R: [PLUTO-soci] 
> [alberanid a libero.it: [Discussioni] lettera a	deputati	e senatori]
> 
> >Stimo Stallman, ma non possiamo cancellare il fenomeno Open Source
> >cancellandone la parola.
> Sono in totale disaccordo con te su questa 
> cosa. Alla base del free sofware ci sono implicazioni morali e, quindi, 
> politiche. L'open source nasce appunto per evitare ogni presa di 

	Sono in totale disaccordo con te su questa affermazione :-)

	Politico e morale sono due cose distinte e che tali devono
	sperabilmente restare.

> posizione politica. Non vedo alcun motivo di scrivere una lettera a dei 
> politici su un movimento che è nato proprio per non prendere posizione 
> politiche. 

	La proposta che ho fatto di usare il termine FLOSS va in
	una direzione non contestabile nemmeno dal piu' osservante
	monaco mistico  stallmanita scalzo di  clausura, a  meno di  
	cadere in tremenda eresia :-)

	Interpellato sulla questione, Ipse dixit: [1] 

	7. Given  that it helps  users to  understand the  freedoms in
free software  when the ambiguous use  of the word free  in english is
clarified, what  do you think  of use of  name FLOSS as  in Free/Libre
Open Source Software?

  	There are  many people, who,  for instance, want to  study our
community,  or write  about our  community, and  want to  avoid taking
sides  between  the  Free   Software  movement  and  the  Open  Source
movement. Often they have heard primarily of the Open Source movement,
and they think that  we all support it. So, I point  out to them that,
in fact, our community was  created by the Free Software movement. but
then  they often  say that  they  are not  addressing that  particular
disagreement,  and that  they  would like  to  mention both  movements
without taking a side. So  I recommend the term Free/Libre Open Source
Software  as a  way they  can mention  both movements  and  give equal
weight to both. And they abbreviate  FLOSS once they have said what it
stands for. So I  think that's a ... If you don't  want to take a side
between  the  two  movements,  then   yes,  by  all  means,  use  that
term. Cause  what I  hope you  will do is  take the  side of  the free
software movement. But not everybody has to. The term is legitimate.

	Sottolineo "But nobady _has_to_ take the side of free software".

	ciao

		Alberto



[1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/audio/rms-interview-edinburgh-040527.txt