From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,577c9f9c0cdd76d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Stanley R. Allen" Subject: Re: Help help.. please.i am totaly new in ada programing Date: 1999/11/04 Message-ID: <3821D198.135B77A1@hso.link.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 544488493 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <7vnsco$o7s$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7voc2d$3eu$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-11-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > > Well the fact of the matter is that free software is quite > well understood at this stage by most people in the field > (we should know :-) The fact that you need to continue to explain it is an indication that this is not true. The ambiguity of the word 'free' is only part of the problem. The distinction frequently noted between 'free speech' and 'free beer' (libre vs. gratis) does not really *explain* what the FSF means by 'free software'. The FSF's definition can only be grasped by understanding some subtle copyright and licensing issues -- all the more subtle because of the history of those issues in the software world (remember Borland's 'simple' license agreement?). It follows therefore that no simple catch-phrase with the suffix '-ware' will instantly cause the 'correct' idea to appear in the mind of an otherwise uninformed person. The phrase 'free software' is an English ideogram, like the other neologisms that compete with it ('open-source software', 'freeware', etc.). All of them require decoding and always will. -- Stanley Allen mailto:s_allen@hso.link.com