| ▲ | whimsicalism 18 hours ago | |
Free software to me means GPL and associates, so if that is what Stallman was trying to be a stickler for - it worked. Open source has a well understood meaning, including licenses like MIT and Apache - but not including MIT but only if you make less than $500million dollars, MIT unless you were born on a wednesday, etc. | ||
| ▲ | whimblepop 16 hours ago | parent [-] | |
MIT and Apache are free software licenses in Stallman's sense, and the FSF has always been clear about it. | ||