Unlike every organization moving to FLOSS that I have ever seen, the EU-Parliament is doing the hard stuff first and leaving the easy stuff to last… They have done nothing to convert their infrastructure to FLOSS, not the networking, not the clients, and not the servers, just the applications:
They have most of the applications converted, so nothing is stopping them from converting all the other infrastructure. There must be 50 ways to migrate to FLOSS and this must be one of them. It’s awkward though because their policy is to prefer FLOSS wherever it meets the specs. It’s been ten years. I would have expected them to be done by now or nearly so. This makes Munich’s migration to GNU/Linux look like a sprint. What’s troubling as they use the terms “open source” and “free” as if only examining the source code matters and $free is the price of support… Oooh! Their classifications for software:
- “Non open source element, used under a commercial element (including support)”
- “Open source element, used fully free”
- “Open source element, used with specific support contracts”
- “Open source based element, used under a commercial license, (including support) ie: enterprise version of open source products”
They are trying to match the useless complexity of M$ and partners’ licensing empires with the simplicity of FLOSS: Free Software and non-Free software with and without support. These guys have been talking to too many salesmen…
Free Software is not about the price. It’s the licence which permits running, examining, modifying and distributing the code. All else is book-keeping. The problem the EU is trying to solve is not reducing cost. That happens automatically when using FLOSS. The problem the EU is trying to solve is eliminating slavery to M$ and partners. Get on with it.