As in, such projects carry baggage, in the form of conflict and infighting among developers, and one can expect irritating pedantry when discussing use and preferences.
Usually, you'll encounter something akin to fanatical fans, expressing highly opinionated views about minor details. Sometimes it's because lawyers have been involved. It's not necessarily toxic, but often reflects splintered cellular activity, among groups seeking to distinguish themselves from one another for some reason.
They are, because pursuing your rights is a political move.
"Free software is a political movement; open source is a development model." — Richard Stallman [1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#cite_note-95
>Usually, you'll encounter something akin to fanatical fans <...>
As in any fight for freedom there are all kinds of people: those who do not understand, those who pretend they do not understand, those who do not know why they are fighting, and so on. No one of them defines the goal of the fight though.
Thankfully, Most languages don't have this problem, since they have 2 distinct adjective for "gratis" and "freedom".
* free - b/c freemium or worthless
* open source - a term big companies who don't care about it like to use to project a positive image of themselves
* libre - imo the best term atm. However, it just doesn't sound alluring.
Idk, how about Freedomware ? ;)
I think the "big companies who don't care about it" thing is exaggerated. Who cares about what terms they use?
Free Software sounds cheap or trashy. It requires explanation. "Free as in beer, and Free as ..."
Open Source is a marketing term to avoid that stigma.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....