Re: freeware?
It's not "one or the other" no matter how GNU might want to paint it, it's a hierarchy.
Inside "Software" is "Freeware". Inside that is closed-source freeware and open-source freeware. Using one term that encompasses more than you intend is fine, it would be the other way round that's dangerous (e.g. saying they were "open" tools but they were really just freeware).
And the definition of freeware as such far predates anything GNU might have come up with. They just don't like the term "open source freeware" - which is EXACTLY what they make.
It's an overlap in a Venn diagram between free/commercial and open/closed source. Demanding that people are ultra-specific about it is one way to really put people off. It's freeware. It just happens to be open-source too. There is plenty of open-source non-freeware and vice versa to distinguish.
Nobody elected FSF/GNU the authority on what every category of software should be referred to as, and thank God for that...
Biting the hand that feeds IT
