Dear Arun,

Why not ? That is atleast far better than using totally propreitary systems which does not come with any source at all right ?

according to the Open Source Definition and the definition of free software given by the Free Software movement, both are one and the same. But its all about what the people in each of these two movements say about the software.

For a person in the Open Source movement, the reason for the using the software would be - "It's of high quality. It's cheap."

For a person in the Free Software movement, the reason for using the software is - "It gives me the freedom to share the software with my friends. It gives me the freedom to modify the program to my needs. It gives me the freedom to distribute modified versions of the program."

And the fact that "many" free softwares are of high quality is actually a consequence of these freedoms.

This has mislead many people in the open source movement to use a combination of free software and proprietary software, just because they are of high quality.

If my memory is correct, Bruce Perens left the OSI saying "We need to talk more about freedom."

If we concentrate on the "consequence" we will slowly loose all our freedoms, and come back to square one!

- Vijay

Non-free* software sucks. - RMS * 'free' as in freedom.

--------------------------------------------- This message was sent from RECTMAIL. http://www.rect.edu/ or http://rangoli.rect.ernet.in/