• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Open source software is practically the same as free software, with only a handful of deviations:

    In “Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software,” Stallman explains: “The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement.”

    FOSS is just the term for both groups together (Free and Open Source Software).

    • fmstrat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      55 months ago

      You have it backwards. Free and Open Source software is Open Source (subset). But Open Source is not Free and Open Source (superset).

      Langfuse is a great example of where this is the case: https://github.com/langfuse/langfuse/blob/main/LICENSE

      It is open source, but all features under the ee folder are not free, thus it is not FOSS.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 months ago

        From reviewing the license, the portions under the ee directory are not open source, they’re source-available with some additional grants of rights given certain conditions.

        Here’s the definition I use for “open source”, and here’s the one I use for “free software”. Most (all?) free software licenses meet the definition of free software, but not all open source licenses meet the definition of free software, so that’s why I tend to set that free software is a subset of open source software.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            No, the portions outside the EE directory are both open source and free software because it satisfies the definitions of both. The software in the EE directory satisfies neither. The combined work is neither, it’s a mix of FOSS and source-available.