Re: Woctave-another gui front end

[Sergei Steshenko]

----- Original Message -----
> From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: 
> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 11:27 PM
> Subject: Re: Woctave-another gui front end
> 
> On 12/20/2012 03:01 PM, Benjamin Abbott wrote:
>>  On Dec 20, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden> 
> wrote:
>> 
>>>  ________________________________
>>>>  From: Benjamin Abbott <address@hidden>
>>>>  To: Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden> 
>>>>  Cc: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden>; 
> "address@hidden" <address@hidden> 
>>>>  Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:51 PM
>>>>  Subject: Re: Woctave-another gui front end
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  On Dec 20, 2012, at 3:46 PM, Sergei Steshenko 
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> 
>>>>>  From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden>
>>>>>  To: Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden>
>>>>>  Cc: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <address@hidden>; 
> "address@hidden" <address@hidden>
>>>>>  Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:30 PM
>>>>>  Subject: Re: Woctave-another gui front end
>>>>> 
>>>>>  On 20 December 2012 14:11, Sergei Steshenko 
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>  Regarding open source but not quite free - have a look at 
> METIS: 
>>>>> 
> http://glaros.dtc.umn.edu/gkhome/metis/metis/faq?q=metis/metis/faq#distribute 
> .
>>>>> 
>>>>>  METIS is not open source nor free. If you forbid commercial 
> use, you
>>>>>  are neither.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  - Jordi G. H.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Metis _is_ open source. I _do_ download it and build it from 
> source. Download URLs:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  http://www.netlib.org/linalg/metis-4.0.tar.gz
>>>>> 
> http://glaros.dtc.umn.edu/gkhome/fetch/sw/metis/metis-5.0.2.tar.gz
>>>>> 
>>>>>  , etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  You do _not_ have monopoly defining what freedom is.
>>>> 
>>>>  Regarding open source, I think Jordi is correct.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  Ben
>>> 
>>>  FTA: "Generically, open source refers to a program in which the 
> source code is available to the general public for use and/or modification 
> from 
> its 
>>>  original design free of charge, i.e., open.".
>>> 
>>>  I have published URLs using which the general public can download METIS 
> source free of charge. The URLs are _not_ of pirated SW kind.
>>> 
>>>  Regards,
>>>    Sergei.
>> 
>>  METIS is not generally available for use  for commercial purposes.  Hence, 
> not open source.
>> 
>>  Ben
> 
> 
> OK, I get it now.  "Free" versus "open-source" is not 
> "BSD" versus "GPL"
> as I originally thought it was (and as Sergei suggested to me it was),
> but is actually a rather irrelevant in-house fight over semantics that
> people get very energized about.
> 
> I'm still rather amazed that one of you compared "open-source" to 
> a
> racial epithet!
> 
> Anyway, I'll cease worrying about the distinction, and keep calling it
> "open-source" just like I always have.  Please carry on your argument,
> which from now on I'll stay out of.
> 
> Adios,
> Stephen
> _______________________________________________
> Help-octave mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave
>

"OK, I get it now.  "Free" versus "open-source" is not  "BSD" versus "GPL" as I 
originally thought it was (and as Sergei suggested to me it was)" - huh ?


I said that to _me_ BSD is _more_ free than GPL because _less_ strings are 
attached.

The _truly_ free license is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL - _exactly_ 
because _no_ strings are attached.

Again, I do _not_ accept FSF/GNU definition of freedom _exactly_ because it 
contradicts my _biological_ sensation what freedom is.


Regards,
  Sergei.