Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
United States GNU is Not Unix Software The Almighty Buck

Open Source in California Government 434

catfoo writes "California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has recently posted the California Performance Review Report, a 2,500 page plan to overhaul state government and save $32 billion over the next five years. Part of the proposal: Open Source alternatives. Imagine that..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Open Source in California Government

Comments Filter:
  • The Governator! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mfh ( 56 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:06AM (#9958899) Homepage Journal
    The Governator should be applauded for his adoption of Open Source in the government. My only question is whether the Open Source solutions will have to be made in California, because it is my understanding that The Governator is against Hollywood productions saving money by filming up north in Canada. I think this is a *great* move to use Open Source in the government because it will help keep everything much more secure and stable than going with expensive closed source anti-solutions. I only wonder if this will mean that Allnold will be moderating his anti-Canadian rhetoric any time soon? A great deal of Open Source comes from Canada [jcomserv.net].
    • I only wonder if this will mean that Allnold will be moderating his anti-Canadian rhetoric any time soon?

      I think he's more concerned with attempting to keep Hollywood spending money right here in our fine country rather than outsourcing locations.
    • Re:The Governator! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by foidulus ( 743482 ) * on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:25AM (#9959152)
      I'm not really sure it's the whole "Open source" movement they are embracing. It's more along the lines of finding the best tool for the job. Sometimes it's open source, sometimes it's closed. But I want my government to spend the least amoung of my tax dollars while still getting the job done. I honestly don't care what kind of software they are using as long as it's functional and secure.
      • by anti-NAT ( 709310 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @12:19PM (#9960423) Homepage

        I'm certainly an OSS advocate, that's all I run, and all I have run for the last two years.

        I do agree with using the best tool for the job in Government, be it open or closed source.

        However, I really think a prerequisite, in the case of close source being the best tool, is an open data format. It shouldn't be acceptable to have government, and therefore the public's data locked away inside a file that only one application can process.

        Yes, I know that OO.org can handle Word documents, for example. However, it shouldn't be necessary to reverse engineer the file format each time MS release a new version. That isn't an open data format, and so I don't think government should use MS word.

    • "My only question is whether the Open Source solutions will have to be made in California, because it is my understanding that The Governator is against Hollywood productions saving money by filming up north in Canada."

      The governor of California is in favor of industries in California. Microsoft is based in Washington.
    • I really don't think the Arnold wants to stop hollywood companies from using Canada not because of any hidden antipathy towards people who put maple leaves on their flags, but rather because of Canada's large movie subsidies [ftacusa.org]. Since Canada doesn't subsidise open source development I don't think California has any reason not to import that.
    • His stance on filming in Canada is ironic considering all of his most recent films where filmed in Vancouver,BC,Canada.

      He made a lot of money off our beautiful scenery.

  • The GOVERNATOR wants open source alternatives eh?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:41AM (#9959340)
      No one actually believed that Mr. Muscle man had the training and experience necessary to fun the fifth largest economy in the world...

      They didn't vote for him because of his party affiliation either.

      He was perceived as being a real human, rather than another product of the political machine. Sheeple, for all their stupidity, are still able to recognize that successful politicians achieve their success by favor-swapping and compromise. This means that by the time any given politician arises to a position of real power, he or she is alreay so loyalty-laden that acting independently is outright impossible.

      Arnold has no such loyalties tying him down...so he can actually make decisions that benefit the majority and make sense. The fact that his own agenda is actually beneficial to the people at large is, IMO a Very Good Thing.

      $0.02
  • by vondo ( 303621 ) * on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:07AM (#9958911)
    Currently running IIS and an average uptime of about three days. See here [netcraft.com].
  • by ALeavitt ( 636946 ) * <[aleavitt] [at] [gmail.com]> on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:07AM (#9958912)
    This is obviously because Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are girly-men.
    • Yah, dis is true.

      Heh Hans, vatch me as I flex my tight buttocks against my spandex pants and throw da little wimpy girly boys out da vindow.

  • by tcopeland ( 32225 ) * <tom@@@thomasleecopeland...com> on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:08AM (#9958923) Homepage
    [...] it is recommended that state departments actively research and evaluate open source code alternatives prior to considering use of the traditional procurement model for software.
    That makes a lot of sense, and it provides a good incentive - anything to avoid the crushing burden of the govt procurement process!
    • This quote in particular got my attention.

      Looking to the open source community for applications that serve the same function as closed source solutions may cause vendors to be more flexible with pricing and licensing structures.
      Basically, it boils down to "where applicable, use it as a bargaining chip for proprietary software instead," huh guys? Good thinking.
  • by FortKnox ( 169099 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:08AM (#9958924) Homepage Journal
    Wow... I haven't been an Arnie fan since his desecration of a movie, T3... but this evens the boards back out. Hell, this even puts him back over to the good side.

    Now if he gets a cameo (along with Jessie Ventura) in AvP... that'll put'm both in highest regards in my book ;-)
    • Arnie was fine in T3. It was the little shit they got to play John Conner that ruined it. That and for a movie that had an apocolypse scene, it was WAY to fucking cutesy. I mean, T2 was dark and really got emosional at points. This was definatly not the case in T3... oh well.
  • by bsd_usr ( 140514 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:10AM (#9958951) Homepage
    BSD. Yes, California should finally use BSD more than just a research project. Finally put their spent tax money to work for them. That's my opinion.
  • ...a serious Republican like Arnold would let something like this out. I figured he and his people would've thought Open Source software was too fast-and-loose appearing, too ideologically different to use.
    • You can say that again. A really surprising move from a conservative government.

      Although, if I understand this right, this is still at a recommendation level, and would have to be made official policy first to become standard practise?

      We'll see what happens after the lobbyists have done their job.
      • by Bull999999 ( 652264 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:34AM (#9959263) Journal
        You can say that again. A really surprising move from a conservative government.

        How can you call the California government a conservative government? Just because Arnold is a republican? He's probably more liberal than some of the southern democrats.
        • by brlancer ( 666140 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @11:26AM (#9959868) Homepage Journal
          How can you call the California government a conservative government? Just because Arnold is a republican? He's probably more liberal than some of the southern democrats.

          s/some/most/

          California is its own special blend of politics; it is a huge state both in terms of population and footprint and its people run the gammut. Schwarzenegger is quite "liberal" in social issues--he's anti-gun, pro-abortion rights, pro-gay rights. He's conservative in fiscal issues. Look around CA and you'll find lots of strange combinations of political ideology.

          Compare this to the south, where people tend towards extreme social conservatism (no gays, no abortion, guns for everyone) combined with a desire for larger government fiscal investment.

          Government schleps are the political ideologues, not the people.

          None of this is black and white; Schwarzenegger is becoming more partisan because the Republican party is forcing him to, not necessarily because he believes that crap. This F/OSS initiative is a positive step that he's able to break away from the partisan crap and do something useful.

          • Schwarzenegger is not "anti-gun." I doubt any but the most left-wing whacko is "anti-gun", the term would be "pro gun control." In any case, he supports the Brady Bill and closing the the gun show "loophole" but has also made it clear that he supports the 2nd amendment. As to his interpretation of it, that is still unclear. I'm not sure if he's pro-gay enough for most of the liberals here, because he does not support gay marriage. Frankly, he's way too un-Terminator like for me on that issue, because his r
      • But if he cuts costs he can cut taxes and what Republican doesn't like to cut taxes.

        Besides have you seen the California budget? YIKES! They could replace all the laptops with etch-a-sketches and barely make a dent in their IT budget.
    • by MemoryDragon ( 544441 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:16AM (#9959027)
      I think this is more the austrian mentality Schwarzenegger has been grown up with before he went to California. Have in mind overe here in Austria, after the second world war we had a political climate of talking with each other no matter which party and to try to find solutions out of a problem no matter what lobbyists are behind. That climate has changed the last ten years, but that exactly was the climate you can see with Schwarzenegger, once in the office he started to talk with both parties. I would not say he is a conservative, he is more a free thinker who is on the conservative side.
    • by finkployd ( 12902 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:19AM (#9959065) Homepage
      In my experience, Open Source (while often associated with the left) seems to reach across all political idealogies. What is weird to me is that people keep thinking of it as communism and to me is it the purest form of democracy.

      Finkployd
      • What is weird to me is that people keep thinking of it as communism and to me is it the purest form of democracy

        You should know better. :) Government schools have sufficiently muddied the facts such that even the dictionaries don't have any objective defintions of communism or democracy. Wording is always carefully chosen such that it is impossible to separate "communism" from mental images of a dilapidated and oppressive slum while "democracy" always brings up mental images of a shining statue of liber
      • depends on what your talking about.
        As for political idealogies, it fits with both democratic and communistic ways. As for Economical idealogies, it fits way more with communistic than with capitalism.
        • ... more like the other way around. Communism wouldn't recognize the GPL because it implies private ownership of published works.
          • Ya, but it's purpose is to keep it open and free for all, which is more communistic, regardless of details.

            With Pure Capitalism, you would charge whatever gets you the largest profit for your hard work, which is directly oposite of the purpose of open source. Not that you can't make money with open source, but giving away your code to competitors is not the best path to getting profits.
            • With Pure Capitalism, you would charge whatever gets you the largest profit for your hard work

              I beg to differ. With pure capitalism you would own the products of your labor and be free distribute it to others for what ever form of currency you wish (in the GPL case, it's the products of the next guy's labor, but could easily be some other form of barter under a different license). Some people think of the GPL-flavor of OSS as more a part of a Gift Economy, but I see it as an exchange of current goods (yo
        • As for Economical idealogies, it fits way more with communistic than with capitalism.

          I disagree with that notion because you don't have to pay for and/or use open source software if you don't want to. If MS has it's way, everyone will be required to pay MS tax (it's already done in a way via computers coming with OEM licenses) and in return, every household gets to run a copy of windows and office, and they'll also receive a portrait of Bill Gates that they have to hang on their wall. To me, this sounds
      • Communism has many meanings. If by communism you mean the soviet political system, Open Source/Free Software don't really have much in common with it. However, it is not hard to see how Marx could 'like' the OSS model. OSS puts the computing 'means of production' in the hands of everyone. To compete in the hardware industry means billions of dollars in investments, so you pretty much have to work for a 'capitalist'. In the software business, using the OSS model, a few hundred workers can compete with the bi

    • by foidulus ( 743482 ) * on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:34AM (#9959261)
      As a democrat, I feel dirty for defending a republican, but..
      Republican != neocon. Traditional republicans are ones who try to eliminate as much waste/pork as possible(McCain is a good example of this type). From what I have seen, Arnold is as well.
      The government of California simply wants the best tools to do it's job at the lowest cost. Open source works for that some of the time, others maybe a proprietary solution is the best bet. It all depends on the circumstances, there are very few "silver bullets" in life. It seems that the study indicates that open source alternitaves may be able to deliver the best functionality/cost(it's certainly not free when you consider all the transition costs etc, but long term they believe it will pay off). The government should be looking at what is in the best interest to the taxpayer.
      The neo-cons are another story however. They are into cutting taxes for people who are a whole lot richer than you and I, and then using your taxes to reward their buddies while you and I, and the americans to follow us will foot the bill. (*cough* Accenture *cough*)
      I am hoping for a rift in the Republican party, and who knows, maybe another W. victory might finally cause that rift, but I don't think it's worth the chance.
      • Republican != neocon. Traditional republicans are ones who try to eliminate as much waste/pork as possible(McCain is a good example of this type). From what I have seen, Arnold is as well.

        The problem is on both parties. You have the people who stick exactly to the official party line in order to get the nominatino and you have those who are truly concerned with representing the citizen's best interests. McCain is an excellent example of this and he didn't get the nomination in 2000. We need a TRUE mode
        • Sorry (Score:3, Interesting)

          by beakburke ( 550627 )
          My other response stared to explain the folly of the term "moderate", but I was immediately side tracked by another point. What I was trying to say is that a "moderate" is not a positive definition of what a person IS, it's a reactionary definition of what someone ISN'T. Put another way, moderate relative to what? That's why I say that EVERY elected politician is essentially a moderate, otherwise then couldn't stay in power.

          The problem isn't that there aren't enough moderates, the problem for you is that

      • Republican != neocon. Traditional republicans are ones who try to eliminate as much waste/pork as possible(McCain is a good example of this type)

        It's not as simple as that by any means. McCain was more identified with the neocons than Bush was in 2000. That's why the Weekly Standard endorsed McCain (and also why McCain was a darling of the neo-lib New Republic).

        There's hardly a wasteful neo-con/thrify paleo-con dichotomy. I think it probably depends a lot more on the individual politician, and the circu
      • "there are very few "silver bullets" in life"

        the silver bullets we have are called "common sense"
        the ones we can hire-in are called "experts"
        the ones we are looking for are called "silver bullets"

        Work that out if you can
    • by Anonymous Coward
      You may want to reconsider your perceptions of what Republicans stand for.

      Republicans generally believe competition encourages innovation and efficiency. I'm not surprised by this move at all.
    • ...a serious Republican like Arnold would let something like this out. I figured he and his people would've thought Open Source software was too fast-and-loose appearing, too ideologically different to use.

      i dont get this mentality. i'm in the conservative/libertarian camp, and i use FOSS wherever i can. i use it at home, got a Samba server at work, etc. i have never thought of Open Source as an idealogical problem, and i certainly don't associate it with communism. quite the oppsite--using the GPL

      • -using the GPL and sharing your code is a conscious decision, and people are perfectly free to use it or not. free market, baby ;)

        I'd like to second that. The GPL is based on the premise that I own the products of my own labor, and I can stipulate how it can or can not be used.
    • Maybe that is because you are basing your views on stereotypes instead of real life?
    • Obviously you know little about Schwarzenegger's politics. He's very much a moderate; a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal. Some of his best friends are prominent Dems (eg Tom Arnold). I don't find the proposal at odds with his views at all.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Translation: I must suppress my kneejerk reaction to reject out of hand any suggestion made by a politician because said politician is not a member of a political party approved by me.
  • by kingbyu ( 682024 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:13AM (#9958989) Homepage Journal
    So are they trying to save money by using open source software, or are they only going to "explore" open source alternatives in order to make Microsoft desparate enough to give them discounts?

    Perhaps they saw what Testra did [slashdot.org] to get their discounts and they think they can save their money by doing something similar.

  • Nice write-up (Score:5, Interesting)

    by meganthom ( 259885 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:13AM (#9958995)
    I had no idea a government-produced document could be so clear, concise, and easy to follow. If OSS really takes off in California, maybe other states will turn to this justification. I honestly believe that if more lay-people read similar descriptions of open source software, the doors would be opened to Linux users everywhere.
  • by joeldg ( 518249 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:14AM (#9959006) Homepage
    Just by "posting" that, they are guaranteed massive discounts from microsoft who is scrambling now.

    Either way, it is a win-win for california...

  • by Ogrez ( 546269 )
    /arnold accent

    ITS NOT A TUMOR!!

    /end arnold accent
  • by GillBates0 ( 664202 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:16AM (#9959024) Homepage Journal
    The Terminator
    Terminator 2: Judgment Day
    Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
    and now coming soon to a theater near you...

    Terminator 4: Rise of the Penguins

    Featuring the lovable Tux as the TERMINATORR

    "HE IS BACK"

  • by Osrin ( 599427 ) * on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:16AM (#9959028) Homepage
    ... the OSS angle has been pushed into government policy by a small number of committed activists, as soon as the debate goes beyond the number of people they can talk to directly it all falls apart. It would be interesting to see legislation written in this areas, but be cautious, it takes a lot more than "intent" for something to become "law".
  • "I'll be backup!"

    It'll be interesting how that all turns out. I hope the numbers show up as obviously as it should.

    IT professionals should be training themselves but if not, training is probably already part of the regular budget anyway, except this time instead of getting paid to eat breakfast and lunch at a Microsoft Sales pitch meeting, they might actually learn something. (The ability to actually learn something new separates the I.T. professionals from the wanna-be button pushers... I know the numb
    • I don't believe there is any shortage of extremely talented IT pros in California. There certainly isn't in MA.
  • Part of the proposal: Open Source alternatives. Imagine that...

    So.....I take it that the source code to SkyNet and the T-800 series Terminators will be open sourced? Or will it just be limited to T1000 source code?

  • by MORTAR_COMBAT! ( 589963 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:19AM (#9959069)
    there is such an incredible inefficiency in large corporations, especially governments. there are so many causes of this, it is hard to pick them, but here are just a few:

    1. "tenure". once you're on the job a few years, it's very hard to fire people. people realise this and slack off.

    2. "gotta spend my budget". if you don't spend this year's budget on something, somewhere, next year's budget will be less than this year's budget, regardless of what next year's budget actually needs to be. people realise this and spend money on non-essential things, to preserve their budget slice for next year.

    3. "follow procedure". often large places will have massive procedures for procurement, which end up doing things like making a hammer cost $100 to acquire, desktop computer costs skyrocket, etc.

    4. "workplace as a supply depot for employees". people take reams of printer paper home. it happens. ditto blank CD's, pens, you-name-it. computer monitors, desk chairs, all these things go home with people.

    5. "croneyism and nepotism". similar to situation #1, you have people who retain their jobs when they are not operating at a good personal efficiency -- or are even downright awful performers.

    To fix these things in government, all that is required is (1) absolute transparency of budgets. Every $1 which is collected from taxpayers must be accounted for somewhere. Hundreds of eyes seeing these budgets will find the waste very, very, very quickly. And (2) impartial performance review of employees. Get rid of or "fix" the lazy and inefficient employees -- they are destroying the system in ways that simple material waste cannot even come close to in comparison.
    • While I agree with your problems, I don't think "drown them in yet more red tape" is a viable solution.

      Honestly, the biggest one to crack is the "got to spend the entire budget" attitude. And there's a simple way of achieving it:

      1. Budget allocation meetings are not allowed to take usage of last years budget into consideration. In fact, they won't even be told how much of the previous year's budget has been used.

      2. Departments are allowed to keep the procedes of any underspend for 1 year. If they ha
      • While I agree with your problems, I don't think "drown them in yet more red tape" is a viable solution.

        Yeah, it's a problem: "Who's going to Watch the Watchers?"

        That's why simply publishing the budget and expenditures in a transparent way is a good idea: there are people with time on their hands (see /.) who will look over this data -- for free -- and find the waste.
    • if you were the IT director, you could say

      "I can buy 100 servers with Microsft OSes preinstalled, and a year of support"

      or you could say

      "I can buy 400 servers, have my IT guys throw linux on them, and we buy a year of support for them from Redhat|SuSE|whoever"

  • The real goal? (Score:2, Redundant)

    by div_2n ( 525075 )
    I am not certain that this initiative is about using open source so much as to blackmail proprietary vendors into lowering prices. You have to read till the end to get it, but here is the quote:

    "Looking to the open source community for applications that serve the same function as closed source solutions may cause vendors to be more flexible with pricing and licensing structures."
  • Nothing new.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by manavendra ( 688020 )
    ..most governments over the world have realized the benefits of OSS.

    To have a glimpse [google.com] of OSS and governments all over the world, just use good ol' google

    Interesting to read is CNET on Governments push open-source software [com.com]

    There's even a Getting Open Source Logic INto Governments (GOSLING) Community [goslingcommunity.org]
  • by teutonic_leech ( 596265 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:26AM (#9959159)
    Looks like Arnold turns into the Terminator regarding the State's wasting of taxpayer's money on Windoooz licenses. I'm not a replublican, but he's got my vote on this one. Seriously, one can say a lot about Arnold being a Republican and all, but at least he's not one of those party-line drones I see on Fox and MSNBC all the time. Alongside with people like McCain (and few others who's name I don't remember) he represents the few remaining people who have their own personal convictions but don't engage in 'scorch-the-earth' practices daemonizing anyone who disagrees with them. Anyway, back to the real world, I have some taxes to accrue (which can be wasted on killing brown people in poor countries)....
  • by Anonymous Coward

    "Today, when state agencies purchase software solutions they are required to look at best value, and often go through a formal procurement process wherein vendors submit proposals. Since open source code solutions do not fit the traditional procurement model in that there is not usually a vendor promoting and proposing the product, it is recommended that state departments actively research and evaluate open source code alternatives prior to considering use of the traditional procurement model for software

  • Links to information about this report, unrelated to the open source ideas, basically good information for people in cali. http://report.cpr.ca.gov/ Also a article about how arnalds reform plan "echos" bushes plans. http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2004/0809/news-cal if-08-09-04.asp
  • by dcuny ( 613699 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @10:55AM (#9959498)
    SC06 [ca.gov] suggests:
    • The Governor should direct the state Chief Information Officer to obtain copyright and patent protection on the code owned by the state to protect this valuable resource as an intellectual property.
    While it might look like a plan to simply create a code library, the real goal is, of course, to license this valuable intellectual property:
    • Additional income may be generated in later years through copyright and patent license agreements and sales. That revenue cannot be estimated until all state-owned code is identified.

    The whole suggestion is mangling of ideas, where the author treats "copyright" and "patents" as if they were the same thing. Here's my favorite paragraph:

    • Computer application programs over the last few years have evolved into programming languages that are designed to be easily modified to work in various environments. For example, HTML, XML, Java, LINUX and others are written in modular formats that can be connected in different pieces of code to accomplish a variety of functions.In computer terminology, each computer operating system is called a platform and language code that can be used on more than one platform is called "cross platform code."
    Where to begin with that? I hadn't realized that applications had "evolved into programming languages". What "cross platform" code has to do with anything is beyond me.

    They go on to claim that by using a code library - which will only need four librarians to handle all the code in the State:

    • The State Chief Information Officer should issue a directive requiring all departments to follow the standards and submit all code developed to the library
    we'll be able to code faster, cheaper, and stop using contractors:
    • The savings will be generated by eliminating the need for the approximately 120 consultants involved in application development throughout the various state departments.

    Fortunately, we've got a 30 day period for public comment [ca.gov], so folk from California might want to chime in here!

  • 4 Integrity of the author's source code: Derived works must not interfere with the original author's intent or work;

    Where'd they get this from? I'm not sure what they mean by interfere, but even so, I don't recall any such part of the GPL, for instance.

    I will now go read a copy of the GPL :-)
  • by dacarr ( 562277 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @11:04AM (#9959614) Homepage Journal
    This is probably the best write up on anything that the state has put out. A child of five could understand this.

    But, I don't suspect that this is something to get people like Microsoft to come down. Face it, in order to under bid open source, they'd have to give it out for free. You don't need a MS employee to come and install it, you just need a technician who knows what he's doing; likewise, some random from Red Hat doesn't have to come out and install Linux for you, some guy from MySQL AB doesn't have to come out and install MySQL, etc. You just need a random who knows what he's doing. Or in California's case, a whole lot of said randoms.

    Now, that's not to say they'll work for free; they will naturally want to be put on the state payroll. Either way, you HAVE to pay somebody, and I suspect it probably won't be nearly as much as Microsoft would suggest with their "lower TCO" argument that they like to use with their examples of 7-11.

    So, we'll wait and see.

    And before people spec that CA will reneg on the deal, remember that Munich re-renegged.

  • by AviLazar ( 741826 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @11:30AM (#9959903) Journal
    Open source is the way to bring SkyNet online.
    And here I always thought SkyNet was Windows revenge for BSOD'
  • It's not the tool... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mratitude ( 782540 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @11:32AM (#9959923) Journal
    ... it's the bureaucratic minded people involved.

    I was involved in a major California project in the early 90's where my company was a sub to Lockheed. Some of you may have heard of it as "Dead Beat Dad" tracking.

    The goal was to automate and establish information sharing between cities and counties in California with the additional tie-in of Federal data sharing.

    The result hit the news well after I left the company; I was offered to take over the Project Management duties and I flatly refused. I worked long enough on the project in a support role to see the underlying flaws and why the project would never deliver to goal.

    In order to meet the overall goal, it would require some 50+ county and several hundred city governments to literally cooperate on various details. Of course, the Los Angeles Metro area insisted on being treated like its own little kingdom.

    You'll never get that many bureaucrats and policy wonks to ever cooperate toward a common goal.

    Open Source won't do anything useful toward cost cutting since the technology isn't the cost load factor toward final cost.
  • by doneWithMyTattoo ( 647168 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @11:50AM (#9960144)
    Imagine all the programming power available through senior projects and grad thesis of the University of California and the California State systems. The state of California has an awesome potential to direct that government specific open source software be created or tailored or reviewed to fit their specific needs.
  • by vkevlar ( 545808 ) on Friday August 13, 2004 @01:03PM (#9961025)
    The report is going to be used to discredit government adoption of Linux, by way of discrediting the GPL. My opinion is based on the report's change to rule #9 in the definition of open source.

    The original #9 on Mr. Perens' website("The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software.") [opensource.org] is longer, and clearly GPL friendly; he goes out of his way to state that the GPL is in fact compliant with #9.

    The report version is shorter with no explanation, and actually uses different phrasing: "License must not contaminate other software".
    Sound familiar?

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. -- Winston Churchill

Working...