Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Bastien Guerry (bzg@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 17-Dec-2024 06:40:18 JST Bastien Guerry

   "States should also subsidize the development and maintenance of free software solutions where they do not currently exist that should run on the public-led cloud."

   Well said!

   👀 https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/sites/bartlett_public_purpose/files/reclaiming-digital-sovereignty.pdf

   The whole document is title "Reclaiming Digital Sovereignty - A roadmap to build a digital stack for people and the planet" and it seems worth reading.

   • clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Bastien Guerry (bzg@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 27-Dec-2024 12:43:17 JST Bastien Guerry

     in reply to

     • BiPolarBear

     @grendel84 I take it that "they" means the States? It's part of my current job to help public sector organisations release their source code under a Free Software licence, and I can tell you: the cost is not "very little" 😶 But yeah, agreed on the security argument.

     We're slowly getting there:

     🇳🇱 https://developer.overheid.nl/repositories
     🇮🇹 https://developers.italia.it/en/search.html?type=software_open&sort_by=release_date&page=0
     🇩🇪 https://opencode.de/en
     🥖 https://code.gouv.fr/sources/

     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     BiPolarBear (grendel84@tiny.tilde.website)'s status on Friday, 27-Dec-2024 12:43:18 JST BiPolarBear

     in reply to

     @bzg

     If nothing else it would be a huge improvement for them to simply open source their in-house apps they've built.

     That would cost very little and do a lot of good.

     (if they cry about security, point out that if viewing the source leads to a compromise they've already failed)

   • Embed this notice
     Bastien Guerry (bzg@fosstodon.org)'s status on Friday, 27-Dec-2024 12:44:56 JST Bastien Guerry

     in reply to

     • BiPolarBear

     @grendel84

     - Git training for the teams
     - Security checks in the Git history
     - Time spent choosing a forge
     - Time spent choosing a license
     - Time spent defining the reasonable commitment of the team
     - ... and other time/money costs, depending on the public organisation.

     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 27-Dec-2024 12:44:56 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • BiPolarBear
     @bzg @grendel84 "[one does not] simply open source [one's] in-house apps" 😁
   • Embed this notice
     BiPolarBear (grendel84@tiny.tilde.website)'s status on Friday, 27-Dec-2024 12:44:57 JST BiPolarBear

     in reply to

     @bzg
     Yeah sorry I should have specified the country.

     That's a cool job! I'm really curious about what drives the cost? Is it from stripping out sensative info?

   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 27-Dec-2024 12:45:05 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • BiPolarBear

     As someone who writes or leads the writing of in-house apps, I can say that making an in-house app fit for reuse even by another department or division *within the same company* may involve a lot of refactoring and reengineering to remove assumptions and dependencies, especially the assumption that this is the one deployment in the world.

     @bzg @grendel84

   • Embed this notice
     Bastien Guerry (bzg@fosstodon.org)'s status on Saturday, 28-Dec-2024 18:36:53 JST Bastien Guerry

     in reply to

     • clacke
     • BiPolarBear

     @clacke @grendel84 This is why Open Source Programme Offices are important IMHO: they help teams within the same company understand what they can/should share in terms of FLOSS skills, usage tips and upstream contributions.

     And sometimes it even leads to the release of Free Software (libraries or standalone apps) that is generic and useful to others - but that's more like the icing on the cake.

     clacke likes this.