[sf-lug] "Free": Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) (& OSD)

[Michael Paoli]

Much thanks for mentioning the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)
again.  Although I'm quite familiar with the DFSG, you caused me to
realize that the DFSG really embodies what I tend to think of as far as
what "free" (as in "open source" and freedom) software is ... or at
least ought to be.  I think the DFSG does a superb job of capturing what
"free" software is and should be.

For anyone who hasn't yet read it, highly recommended reading:
http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines

references/excerpts:
http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2009q3/006894.html

Quoting Rick Moen (rick at linuxmafia.com):

> Quoting Grant Bowman (grantbow at gmail.com):

> Anyway, FWIW, I vastly prefer DFSG (the Debian Free Software Guidelines)
> as a criterion for "free software" over anything FSF has ever offered.
> E.g., what used to be called the Four Freedoms Essay and lately has been
> styled the "Free Software Definition" strikes me as functionally useless
> for evaluating licences, on account of excessive vagueness.  So, I
> consider "free software licences" to mean "licences satisfying DFSG".

> > What about those licenses that are FSF certified but not OSI
> > certified?

> Basically meaningless trivia revolving around a couple of licences
> (or maybe as few as one licence) that nobody really cares about to begin
> with.  And _also_ irrelevant from my perspective to start with, because
> I consider DFSG the relevant criterion as to whether a software licence
> is "free".  Since DFSG happens to be almost precisely identical to the
> OSD (OSD having been created by slightly modifying DFSG to remove Debian
> references), I personally consider there to be _zero_ difference between
> the set of free software licences and that of open source licences.