Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
Open-source government advocates across the golden plains.
Linux and open-source advocates have a
passion for contributing. In this article, we explore the topic of
Linux and open-source software serving government through the
efforts of some interesting, geographically dispersed individuals.
These individuals may not realize the profundity of their
contributions, but then visionaries rarely do.The effect of open-source software on theories of economics
has emerged again. In the most recent edition of Linux
Journal, Doc Searls further illuminated the economic
shift in the most profound distinction I have seen since I began
the study of economics 25 years ago. In a quote from the article,
"Practical Penguin Progress" (Linux Journal,
August 2003), Doc states:Free software and open source are ways that the
demand side supplies itself. Call this DIY-IT, or Do It Yourself
Information Technology. In some cases, DIY-IT is so well developed
that customers hardly need vendors at all.
DIY-IT is causing a shift in market power from supply to
demand...Here the demand side--the customer--is in a position to
supply itself.In the traditional economic model of
production-distribution-consumption, Linux and open source break
the mold of the old paradigm. In the purest sense, Doc describes a
perpetual motion machine that, in economics, would crack the
existing model and end the need for producers and distributors of
energy. Free and open-source software does the same thing.Three Who DoIf Do It Yourself Information Technology continues breaking
the extant paradigm, people such as Kevin Pate, Jeff Self and
Richard Brice will have made a difference. I recently interviewed
these gentlemen, and they put an exclamation point on what
open-source software is doing in local and state
governments.Linux Journal: You chose to
build an application or applications with Linux and or other
open-source software. Tell us what you're doing.Jeff: We (the City of
Newport News, Virginia) have developed several applications built
with open-source tools. Most of these applications have been
Web-based. We have a JSP application that our city inspectors
connect to with cell phones. We have really jumped into PHP
development as well. We are using both PostgreSQL and MySQL for our
databases. We are now looking at Python for some things we
previously were planning on using Java for. Python just seems to be
much easier to develop in. And we are taking a serious look at
Zope. We are trying to find an open-source project manager
application for our development team. We are promoting the use of
OpenOffice.org wherever possible to city employees.Kevin: The City of Houston
plans on exploring the use of Linux in [its] infrastructure as much
as possible. Once the city realizes the cost saving potential, I
believe Linux will take a stronghold in [the] server environment.
In the near future, the City of Houston will explore the benefits
of moving its Oracle databases to the Linux platform, as well as
some file and print services. My firm, Pate Consulting, is working
diligently with the City of Houston to produce a solid Linux
strategy that will help the city and its taxpayers save hundreds of
thousands, if not millions, of dollars.Rick: I work for the Bridge
and Structures Office of the Washington State Department of
Transportation, and I develop applications for designing highway
bridge structures. The people that use these kinds of applications
presently work with Windows. However, I have latched onto and am
modeling all of my work after something more important than a
single software platform: the culture of the Open Source community,
the bazaar style of development and the willingness to cooperate
and collaborate openly with others. Open source offers advantages
that I just can't pass up.LJ: Do you think Linux is
making progress in government?Jeff: Yes. A combination of
things is helping. Linux is acceptable now, unlike three or four
years ago. When IBM pumped $1 billion into Linux, a lot of
manager's eyes were opened. The economy also is helping Linux and
open source. City governments are struggling to meet budgets.
Because of this, Linux looks better and better.Kevin: Linux is gaining
momentum in government. Not only for the US, but it's also [doing
so in] foreign governments as well. In addition, I heard that the
City of Austin currently is performing a large Linux rollout. The
more government entities are willing to adopt Linux, the easier it
will be to make a push for Linux in one's own city. Governments
worldwide are realizing the cost savings can be phenomenal.
Moreover, they realize Linux is a tool they can utilize and
customize fully due to its open-source licensing.Rick: My interface with our
IT department tells the story. There are those that see the
technology budgets and know we can get equivalent or superior
functionality from Linux-based solutions. Progress is being made in
the sense that the level of awareness has been raised, and some are
willing to start investigating Linux solutions. I've shared Linux
distros with some of these people, and they are very excited about
what they've seen.LJ: Kevin, being in the
Houston area, the city government reached out for your help with
Linux; is that correct?Kevin: Actually, I heard
[the city] needed some help upgrading [its] Linux-based Web
servers, participated in the bidding process and got the
job.LJ: Tell us more about
[Houston's] process of finding you.Kevin: The City of Houston
releases RFPs when a particular project generates a need for
services. Vendors (who have obtained a vendor number from the city)
participate in the bidding process for an RFP. At that time, the
city chooses the best proposal for the job including price,
experience, etc.LJ: You're Cisco certified,
an MCSE and a Red Hat Certified Engineer; how do you use those
credentials to attract business?Kevin: The Cisco and
Microsoft certification are not really used anymore to attract new
clients, because we are strictly a Linux shop now. However, I do
use them on our web site and in my signature to reveal the
technological experience and diversity I have obtained during my
career. The Red Hat certification helps tremendously in obtaining
new Linux work. This certification shows potential clients that I
have done more than just play around with Linux. When the very
company that has the #1 Linux distribution certifies you, it erases
many doubts [for] potential clients.LJ: Jeff, in Newport News,
did you find any resistance within the unit to using Linux?Jeff: There hasn't been too
much resistance at all. In fact, when I started working here, they
were already running Linux for the city's intranet. I happened to
work outside of the IT department initially. Many departments in
the city have an information technology analyst. I was the first of
the ITA's to run Linux. Now, many of the ITA's are running Linux
servers for file sharing. The IT department finally got serious
about Linux once they realized [how] many of the ITA's were already
using it.LJ: You have your own ideas
about creating an outreach initiative. What are you trying to
accomplish?Jeff: Our director of
information technology started working here last Fall. We started
exchanging ideas [over] email soon after he arrived. I let him know
my opinions of open-source software. We both believe that city
governments are a perfect fit for the open-source model of
development. Every city has the same functions. We have seven
cities in the metropolitan area of Hampton Roads. Why not get the
seven cities to work together on software development? We're not
competing with one another, so there is no reason we shouldn't work
together. Of course, each city has its own way of functioning in
day-to-day operations. But I think the software could be written to
be flexible enough to allow for each city's unique way of doing
business.I'm of the belief that city governments should be looking at
ways to save taxpayers money. I think too many people working for
city governments forget that the money they spend belongs to the
citizens. That's why I believe Linux and other open-source software
can and should play a vital role in city government.LJ: Without breaching any
confidentiality, what's next for Newport News?Jeff: Our director is really
pushing for an ERP system to replace many of our applications on
the mainframe. It's possible that we may run it on Linux. We also
will be looking at a groupware system down the road. We are keeping
our eyes on potential open-source groupware applications. We are
also looking for an open-source job description system, possibly
utilizing XML to replace our current system, which keeps all job
descriptions in Word Perfect.LJ: What's your vision for
the future of your department?Jeff: I think open source
will play a key role in shaping the look of our department in the
future.LJ: What should governments
look for in Linux applications?Jeff: They should look for
projects that have an active development cycle and a strong user
base. A large user base means others [are] out there [who] can
provide their experiences and help out with problems. An active
development cycle means new features will be coming and the chances
of the project being abandoned are slim.LJ: Rick, without breaching
any confidentiality, what's next for your government?Rick: I can only speak for
the little microcosm in which I work. We will continue to develop
bridge engineering solutions to make our design functions more
efficient and consistent. We will continue to build an
infrastructure of software components that other engineers can use
to jump-start their development projects. We will continue to seek
out others with similar needs and interest to form cooperative
relationships. And most importantly, we will continue to promote
the open source concept.LJ: What's your vision for
the future of your department?Rick: My vision is to have
the developers in the agency be thinking about and seeking out
opportunities to collaborate with others in government doing
similar work. It isn't something that can be mandated or enforced.
It is something that will require a slow and gradual cultural
change. I hope to lead by example and show success.LJ: What should governments
look for in Linux applications?Rick: Best value. It is the
same old story that has been told countless times. Assess your
needs, and pick the solution that offers you the best value.
Governments should be open-minded about Linux applications. Use
them where they make sense.LJ: Kevin, what do you think
the future will look like?Kevin: The future of Linux
is very bright for several reasons. For one, the hardware support
and features in the Linux kernel keep advancing at a rapid pace.
For example, the Linux 2.6 kernel, which is due out sometime this
year, contains support for asynchronous I/O, USB 2.0, IPSec and
cryptography, as well as support for a multitude of new hardware.
Linux has a future because it is a community more than it is a
product. Communities with one common interest tend to survive for
many years. In conjunction with the growing technological needs of
our society and the thriving community of Linux, the future is very
solid.In the article mentioned above, Doc pointed out that "Linux
is a project, not a product". Because the community creates the
project, the thinking appears to be growing on a sub-conscious
level. That growth doesn't appear to have geographic
boundaries.I wish to thank the people who contributed to this
article.Tom Adelstein works as a
Linux consultant in Dallas, Texas. His current interest lies in the
field of web services, security and supporting Linux
deployments.
email: tadelste@ipal.org
______________________
This week 5 lucky Members will receive a copy of The Official Ubuntu Server Book by Benjamin Mako Hill and Linux Journal's very own Kyle Rankin. No entry necessary. Check back here early next week to find out who the lucky Online Members are.
Comments
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
>That said, I agree with those who say there should not be a mandate
>for ONLY OSS - it must compete on its merits, but from what I've
>been reading (and I'e been reading a lot about this lately), there are
>a lot of lobbying efforts to prevent just that.
While this thinking sounds logical, its ground of being comes out of a model of FTC style free trade. Mandating OSS in government is not in restraint of trade.
The notion of competitive bidding in government procurement confuses people even more.
Those who feel that OSS should not be be mandated could use the logic to say that the election process shouldn't be mandated, and that we shouldn't mandate rule of law.
Government exists to serve and protect the people. To treat it as part of a market is to to suggest that regulators of the market (such as the stock market) should be allowed to freely trade on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
Follow the logic and you will see that it leads to impossible scenarios where peole with information not available to everyone can gain market advantage.
Consider that we have software for nuclear weapons where the code no longer exists. The government never mandated that it be provided as part of the procurement process.
OSS does not have to compete on merit when the government is the buyer. It should provide open standards, open source and the taxpayer should not have to pay a second time for procuring it.
Almost every piece of software that makes up the Internet resulted from government grants. Foundations organized to continue development usually inherit the grant-paid development.
Even indirectly, taxpayers money keeps the IT industry alive, especially at the University and K12 level.
Who do you think pays for government?
Read Plato's "The Republic". Review your notes from Economics 101 or take Economics and stay awake.
Government should use OSS software unless it cannot find what it needs. Then, it can acquire software on the market, but the vendor should be compelled by law to hand over the source. If Oracle and Microsoft don't like it, other vendors will emerge.
Thinking such as that which prompted this reply is the result of media based television, people on autopilot, learning. Turn off your television and read text books. You know not of what you speak.
Wake up.
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
My goodness! Did we not have a good night?
If this is the way you respond to an endorsement, I'm looking forward to seeing your response to a rebuttal.
I've already addressed a lot of your directives and questions in some text that is part of an effort to encourage the US government to require the release of SW developed under federal grant as Open Source. You can read the proposal at:
www.openinformatics.org - see http://www.openinformatics.org/petition.html and the supporting FAQ at:
http://www.openinformatics.org/faq.html
and also follow much of the follow-on at Slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/15/1941219&mode=flat
However, to address the original point of my comment: that an Open Source proposal should complete on its merits, are you defending the position that an inferior proposal and implementation using Open Source should be accepted over a superior proposal (that uses proprietary software but otherwise implements standards and provides its source code under escrow) simply because it is Open Source?
Or are you saying that the RFP be closed to any proposal that isn't Open Source? Either way, you're excluding proprietary solutions that might be superior to the Open Source solution in many ways.
Especially for Enterprise IT situations (>10,000 users, >10,000 cpus), Open Source has not (yet) provided a number of very important implementations (see Robert Lefkowitz (r0ml)'s very good presentation reported by Tim O'Reilly at:
http://www.oreillynet.com/lpt/wlg/3501. His slides are supposed to be made available as well via O'Reilly.com
Perhaps as a result, these kinds of implementations WILL spawn a viable OSS solution, but I'm not holding my breath.
I agree that Open Source is preferable when possible, but sometimes it's not (possible).
Here's my little list of where Open Source has failed and will probably continue to fail:
- where the SW hasn't been defined well enough to be cloned.
- where the OSS version lacks the user feedback that allows developers to polish it sufficiently to appeal to to a wide enough audience.
- where the user base is too small, specialized, and/or lacks monetary impact to make it of interest to OSS developers.
- where there is a requirement for obsessive attention to detail in a timely manner with oversight from highly paid professionals (tax preparation software, contract software, banking software, and see below)
- where there is an inherent requirement for direct product liability (medical device control). This can be OSS, but it requires a company willing to certify it for use.
- and of course, combinations of the above.
And of course, using your own example, do you expect that source code used for nuclear weapon design & testing or the Patriot missile guidance system be made Open Source? (Actually, I'd support that, but I don't see it happening).
So to reiterate my position, until OSS penetrates wider and deeper (about which I'm optimistic), evaluating proposals on their merits seems to be a better approach than blind faith that the OSS development paradigm is better all the time.
Listen to me - it sounds like I'm a paid shill for Microsoft - look what you've done to me...
Harry (not a paid shill for MS) Mangalam
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
Harry, it just occured to me that we're having two conversations. Also, it might help readers understand that while your points live in a separate context than mine, neither set of points invalidate the other.
The bridge simply reads that mandating open source doesn't stop procurement from operating as situation normal.
Also, open source doesn't mean hand the code over to the Chinese.
I can maintain the same security clearance requirements on any product. I just want the code.
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
The relevance of the dharmic references escapes me but I follow (but don't completely buy) the rest.
In fact, here's a reference that came out recently that touches on my point about OSS and proprietary SW competing on merits, but for competely different (and completely wrong) reasons:
http://rss.com.com/2010-1071_3-5050754.html?type=pt∂=rss&tag=feed&subj=news
The author, James DeLong, is from the Department of Unintentionally Hilarity at the Orwellianly named Progress and Freedom Foundation.
Best,
Harry
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
I think that sometimes the smiles and winks don't get translated across the text of message posts. 'ey?
The main point, and this comes from having consulted elective and appointed officials and committees; Government is not an enterprize commercially. Their procurement does not fall under the paradigm as those governed.
The "ground of being" has nothing to do with you specifically and I didn't point my pen at you personally, specifically or assumptively. Rather, I wished to make a point about the listening: The already listened listening of those among us who haven't had a ride on the cluetrain manifesto.
Now, wink ;-)
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
Microsoft DOS and windows
Sprung up and thrived while IBM
and other mainframe manufacturers
had strangle holds on their markets.
Eventually IBM and others had to giveway
to the super mini super computers of the new age.
The same will happen at the Operating System Level.
I had a chance to try out linux. I have always
been extreemly impressed with the type of
application power it has with a less than 300kbyte
software program.
robwade1@earthlink.net
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
Microsoft DOS and windows
Sprung up and thrived while IBM
and other mainframe manufacturers
had strangle holds on their markets.
Eventually IBM and others had to giveway
to the super mini super computers of the new age.
The same will happen at the Operating System Level.
I had a chance to try out linux. I have always
been extreemly impressed with the type of
application power it has with a less than 300kbyte
software program.
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
and one more URL that may have been missed:
http://www.opensector.org
best
Harry
Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V
Great series of articles, if a little uneven - LJ should post the series of links in order.
I've been looking at use cases and propagation of linux in various scenarios and gov't is by far the largest and most significant block. As goes gov't, so goes all the subcontractors, suppliers, vendors, etc who want/need to deal with gov't. Tip gov't and there will be precious little resistance except from proprietary SW vendors.
That said, I agree with those who say there should not be a mandate for ONLY OSS - it must compete on its merits, but from what I've been reading (and I'e been reading a lot about this lately), there are a lot of lobbying efforts to prevent just that.
As Tom reiterates, it's also extremely well-suited to benefit from the use of Open Source (gov't offices generally don't compete (they need functionality, they dont try to sell software competetively), their needs are strongly parallel, they generally have excellent connectivity, they tend to have their own development teams (or recruit local consultants), many departments are well suited to deployment of thin clients, with restricted needs for a huge stew of applications), they generally don't require 3D applications and multimedia) and the fact that it hasn't embraced OSS more strongly is bewildering. Even with MS's 'Don't Lose to Linux' fund, its lobbying efforts, and its good cop/bad cop handling of licensing deals, it's strange to see that it's taken so long for Linux to gain a toehold. On the other hand, since gov't is MS's largest (and perhaps least troublesome) customer, there is a certain reluctance to give up that particularly sustaining teat.
However, it looks like that toehold has been gained (especially fast overseas) and I expect to see US gov'ts embrace Linux as so many other domains have recently.
One thing that I don't think was explicitly mentioned as a strong benefit of OSS for gov't is the process of procurement. As Lisa Nyman-Wolfisch mentioned at the recent O'Reilly OSCON in Portland, one of the biggest wins for them in using OSS was that they didn't have to go thru the procurement process before starting, saving them months of lead time in developing their Census Web site.
I also heard Doc Searls give his DIYIT talk at OSCON and I agree that it's a good way to view the changing face of IT - from a "bit-vendor to consumer" one-way street to a consultancy to consumer in a 2 way interaction.
Again, excellent series of articles.
Best, Harry
hjm@tacgi.com
Post new comment