> The FSF doesn't even support the use of the term "FOSS".
Personally I use "FOSS" as shorthand for FSF's definition of "free software". If that's misleading, then I guess I should stop using it. Would you happen to have a link to a blog post or something about this?
> They support the idea of libre software. The broader "open source" community is much larger than the FSF or RMS.
I'm not talking about the "open source" community. There's a difference between free software and open source software.
It's obvious that I'm not talking about "open source" here, otherwise it'd suggest that I think FSF and RMS are the only ones writing open source software. I can't even imagine a situation where someone could be led to believe that, especially on HN.
> The GPL is the third most popular FOSS license.
Regardless of what you mean by "FOSS" here, how is that statistic relevant to the discussion?
Personally I use "FOSS" as shorthand for FSF's definition of "free software". If that's misleading, then I guess I should stop using it. Would you happen to have a link to a blog post or something about this?
> They support the idea of libre software. The broader "open source" community is much larger than the FSF or RMS.
I'm not talking about the "open source" community. There's a difference between free software and open source software.
It's obvious that I'm not talking about "open source" here, otherwise it'd suggest that I think FSF and RMS are the only ones writing open source software. I can't even imagine a situation where someone could be led to believe that, especially on HN.
> The GPL is the third most popular FOSS license.
Regardless of what you mean by "FOSS" here, how is that statistic relevant to the discussion?