The introduction of the term "open source software" was 是特地为了这个领域让新手和商业人士更加易懂a deliberate effort to make this field of endeavor more understandable to newcomers and to business, which was viewed as necessary to its spread to a broader community of users. 早期称号的问题是，“自由软件”，并非有政治含义，但是那对于新手来说貌似对于价格的关注令人心烦意乱。一个术语需要聚焦于源代码的关键问题而且不会被立即把概念跟那些新东西混淆。一个恰好想出并且满足这些要求的第一个术语被快速接受：开源。
这个术语很长一段时间被用在“情报”（即间谍活动）的情境下，但据我所知but to my knowledge, use of the term with respect to software prior to 1998 has not been confirmed. 下面这个就是讲述了术语“开源软件”如何流行起来并且变成了一项产业和一场运动的名字。
At these meetings, we discussed the need for a new term due to the confusion factor. 观点主要有以下：对于那些新接触“自由软件”的人把它（free）当成了价格。 Oldtimers must then launch into an explanation, usually given as follows: “我们的意思是自由上的，而不是啤酒免费上的。"在这个点子上，一个软件方面的讨论变成了一个关于酒精价格的讨论。At this point, a discussion on software has turned into one about the price of an alcoholic beverage. The problem was not that explaining the meaning is impossible—the problem was that the name for an important idea should not be so confusing to newcomers. A clearer term was needed. No political issues were raised regarding the free software term; the issue was its lack of clarity to those new to the concept.
1998 年 2 月 2 日，Eric Raymond 抵达访问网景并与它一起计划采用免费软件样式的许可证发布浏览器代码。We held a meeting that night at Foresight's office in Los Altos to strategize and refine our message.除了 Eric 和我，活跃的参与者还有 Brian Behlendorf，Michael Tiemann，Todd Anderson，Mark S. Miller and Ka-Ping Yee。但在那次会议上，这个领域仍然被描述成“自由软件”，或者用 Brian 的话说， 叫“可获得源代码的” 软件。
While in town, Eric used Foresight as a base of operations. At one point during his visit, he was called to the phone to talk with a couple of Netscape legal and/or marketing staff. When he was finished, I asked to be put on the phone with them—one man and one woman, perhaps Mitchell Baker—so I could bring up the need for a new term. They agreed in principle immediately, but no specific term was agreed upon.
在那周的会议中，我仍然关注一个更好的名字Between meetings that week, I was still focused on the need for a better name and 提出术语 “开源软件”came up with the term "open source software." While not ideal, it struck me as good enough. I ran it by at least four others: Eric Drexler, Mark Miller, and Todd Anderson liked it, while a friend in marketing and public relations felt the term "open" had been overused and abused and 相信我们能做的更好。理论上它是对的，可我想不出更好的了，所以我想尝试并推广它。 事后一想我应该直接向 Eric Raymond 提案，但在那时我并不是很了解他，所以我采取了间接的策略。
Later that week, on February 5, 1998, a group was assembled at VA Research to brainstorm on strategy. Attending—in addition to Eric Raymond, Todd, and me—were Larry Augustin, Sam Ockman, and attending by phone, Jon "maddog" Hall.
会议的主要议题是推广策略，特别是要接洽的公司。 我几乎没说什么，而是在寻找机会推广已经提交讨论的术语。I felt that it wouldn't work for me to just blurt out, "All you technical people should startusing my new term." Most of those attending didn't know me, and for all I knew, they might not even agree that a new term was greatly needed, or even somewhat desirable.
Fortunately, Todd was on the ball. Instead of making an assertion that the community should use this specific new term, he did something less directive—a smart thing to do with this community of strong-willed individuals. He simply used the term in a sentence on another topic—just dropped it into the conversationto see what happened. I went on alert, hoping for a response, but there was none at first. The discussion continued on the original topic. It seemed only he and I had noticed the usage.
Not so—memetic evolution was in action. A few minutes later, one of the others used the term, evidently without noticing, still discussing a topic other than terminology. Todd and I looked at each other out of the corners of our eyes to check: yes, we had both noticed what happened. I was excited—it might work! But I kept quiet: I still had low status in this group. Probably some were wondering why Eric had invited me at all.
Toward the end of the meeting, the[question of terminology][8]was brought up explicitly, probably by Todd or Eric. Maddog mentioned "freely distributable" as an earlier term, and "cooperatively developed" as a newer term. Eric listed "free software," "open source," and "sourceware" as the main options. Todd advocated the "open source" model, and Eric endorsed this. I didn't say much, letting Todd and Eric pull the (loose, informal) consensus together around the open source name. It was clear that to most of those at the meeting, the name change was not the most important thing discussed there; a relatively minor issue. Only about 10% of my notes from this meeting are on the terminology question.
But I was elated. These were some key leaders in the community, and they liked the new name, or at least didn't object. This was a very good sign. There was probably not much more I could do to help; Eric Raymond was far better positioned to spread the new meme, and he did. Bruce Perens signed on to the effort immediately, helping set up[Opensource.org][9]and playing a key role in spreading the new term.
For the name to succeed, it was necessary, or at least highly desirable, that Tim O'Reilly agree and actively use it in his many projects on behalf of the community. Also helpful would be use of the term in the upcoming official release of the Netscape Navigator code. By late February, both O'Reilly & Associates and Netscape had started to use the term.
这几个月对于开源来说是相当激动人心的。似乎每周都有一个新公司宣布加入计划。Reading Slashdot became a necessity, even for those like me who were only peripherally involved. I strongly believe that the new term was helpful in enabling this rapid spread into business, which then enabled wider use by the public.
当一个被 Eric Raymond写的有关修改术语的早期的陈述被发布在了开放源代码促进会的网站上时，我上了 VA 头脑风暴会议的名单，但并不是作为一个术语的创始人。这是我自己的错，我没告诉 Eric 细节。我一时冲动只想让它表决通过然后我呆在后台，但是 Todd 不这样认为。他认为我总有一天将作为“开源软件”这个名词的创造者而感到高兴。他向 Eric 解释了这个情况，Eric 及时更新了它的网站。
[][13] Christine Peterson-Christine Peterson writes, lectures, and briefs the media on coming powerful technologies, especially nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, and longevity. She is Cofounder and Past President of Foresight Institute, the leading nanotech public interest group. Foresight educates the public, technical community, and policymakers on coming powerful technologies and how to guide their long-term impact. She serves on the Advisory Board of the[Machine Intelligence...][2][more about Christine Peterson][3][More about me][4]
