Devuan and Debian need not defer to the Open Source Initiative regarding
what is Open Source, since the OSI is just using Debian's Free Software
Guidelines. Debian's Free Software Guidelines are a definition of Free
Software, not specifically Open Source. At the time they were created, RMS
personally approved of them as "a good definition of Free Software".

The Four Freedoms promoted by Richard Stallman did not exist in that form
when the DFSG was created. What existed was the *Three* Freedoms, but they
were just about to get an online home at that time (the web was in its
infancy) and I did not make use of them in creating the DFSG. Sometime
later, Richard decided to add Freedom Zero.

There isn't a licensing difference between Free Software, Open Source, and
DFSG-compliant.

Historically, the Open Source campaign spent some time deprecating RMS
because Eric Raymond thought he wasn't palatable to business. I never
approved of that, it was a mistake, and it's over. But as a legacy we have
RMS's effort to differentiate Free Software from Open Source.

The remaining difference between Open Source and Free Software, and IMO the
only real difference there ever has been, is how they are promoted and who
they are promoted to. Richard believes in an *a priori *acceptance of the
importance of your freedom. This sells pretty well to some programmers.
Open Source presents you with the power of Free Software and allows you to
come to the acceptance of the importance of Software Freedom having seen
the evidence. This sells well to other programmers and business people.

    Bruce