[Open-graphics] Discussions with Richard Stallman

[Nicolas Boulay]

Otherwise, under any "Open graphic project" logo/banner, we could add
"design for free software"

2007/1/10, Hamie <hamish at travellingkiwi.com>:
> On Wednesday 10 January 2007 02:54, Timothy Miller wrote:
> > It has been suggested to me in private that we appear to be discussing
> > name changes merely because RMS asked us to.  This isn't what's
> > happening, and I feel I should address it.
> >
> > RMS and the FSF contacted us for the sole purpose of offering us
> > support and publicity.  Their offer was predicated on us supporting
> > Free Software, which is our primary goal anyhow.
> >
> > After some discussion with RMS about OUR needs, I asked him if there
> > was anything WE could do for the FSF.  And only then did he politely
> > suggest that using the word "Free" in place of "Open" would help his
> > cause, and the discussion led thence to the idea of a name change.  He
> > may or may not have thought of that beforehand, but he didn't mention
> > it until I asked.  If RMS's first email to me had begun with
> > criticism, demanding that we change our name or anything else, I would
> > have thanked for his time and moved along unaffected.  Instead, he
> > came to us, offering us unconditional support.
> >
> > The fact is, if any big FOSS organization were to offer us what the
> > FSF can give, we'd jump at the chance.  Imagine if Red Hat offered us
> > money and/or free publicity.  We'd be ecstatic, and we'd happily
> > display their logo in prominent locations.  The FSF is only different
> > in that their "logo" (besides the GNU thing) is a philosophy,
> > represented by words we associate with Freedom.  (Plus, the FSF has a
> > lot more reach.)
> >
>
> I'm getting less & less excited by using the word 'Free' to describe the
> hardware... Especially with regard to the OHF. Unless the Free corresponds
> fairly tightly to 'free to use', then free (As it comes to hardware) comes
> with connotations of the hardware itself being free. Rather than the
> intention which may have been one of
>
> 1. Free HDL to copy, compile, load & ammend & republish as you wish
> 2. Free Documentation & use
>
> or somewhere inbetween... I think it's a rather big jump to say Free Hardware
> & the Open Hardware becomes much more descriptive of what we actually set out
> to achieve. I see being Open as being completely FSF compatible, as Free
> Software may be crafted without prejudice when the intreface is truely open.
>
> H
> _______________________________________________
> Open-graphics mailing list
> Open-graphics at duskglow.com
> http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
> List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
>