From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 15 8:33:50 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mail.nyct.net (bsd4.nyct.net [204.141.86.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF77137B766 for ; Mon, 15 May 2000 08:33:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mbac@nyct.net) Received: from bsd1.nyct.net (root@bsd1.nyct.net [204.141.86.3]) by mail.nyct.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA73516; Mon, 15 May 2000 11:33:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mbac@nyct.net) Received: from localhost (mbac@localhost) by bsd1.nyct.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA54553; Mon, 15 May 2000 11:33:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mbac@nyct.net) X-Authentication-Warning: bsd1.nyct.net: mbac owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 11:33:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Bacarella To: "Daniel C. Sobral" Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Motif goes open source In-Reply-To: <391FDF5C.5473F95B@newsguy.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 15 May 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > Martin Cracauer wrote: > > > > "OpenSource" (without blank) is the term. "Open Source" is like > > "Free BSD", suit-wearers language showing the unfamilarness with the > > subject. > > Really? I have always used (and have no plans to change) "Open Source". > I see no point at all in making it a single word. Alas, they use a > definition of their own, to suit their needs instead of the political > agenda of RMS. RMS's politcal agendas do not include the term 'Open Source'. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message