Texas Hearings On Open Source Bill

fusion812 writes "Senate Bill 1579 is proposed Texas state legislation that would require state agencies to consider 'open source software' when purchasing computer software. The bill has been introduced in the Senate, referred to committee, and is awaiting a schedule date for a hearing." Here's some more information from EFF Austin; fusion812 supplies a summary of the bill's provisions as well as a Real Audio sample of the provided testimony, both below. Also, see this report on NewsForge for some juicy quotes.

A sample recording of testimony can be heard here: http://www.Senate.state.tx.us/ram/archive/2003/may /050803StAffpm.ram

More information: Texas Senate Bill 1579
Senate Bill 1579 proposes that, for all new software acquisitions, a state agency shall:
1. consider acquiring open source software products in addition to proprietary software products;
2. except as provided by Subdivisions (4) and (5), acquire software products primarily on a value-for-money basis;
3. provide justification whenever a proprietary software product is acquired instead of open source software;
4. avoid the acquisition of products that do not comply with open standards for interoperability or data storage;
5. avoid the acquisition of products that are known to make unauthorized transfers of information to, or permit unauthorized control of or modification to the state government's computer systems by, parties outside the control of the state government."

Comments

Texas agencies on mainframe

[NTworks]

I work as a computer operator for a datacenter which is mandated by Texas law, that all state agencies have to consider using our datacenter to outsource their IT, and provide proof they can do it cheaper.

We have many mainframe agencies which spend millions in hardware and software licensing to IBM. We have one on a Sun E10k, and lots of smaller sun boxes, as well as P680 and P690 IBM 64bit mainframe-class AIX servers. A few Win2k clusters.

Nobody uses linux or other open source operating systems.

I could see the possibility of some of the clients migrating to a Linux solution running on the existing IBM s/390 and z/ mainframes, but this kind of thing would take years, and the beaurocracy is incredibly thick. Changing the -littlest- thing in the operation of these computer systems has to go through so many levels, it is truly ridiculous.

The bill's discussion in the RM video

[pgpckt]

Discussion on this bill begins at 1:12:40 into the RM video.

Here is the evaluation

[dracocat]

Sec. 2157.003. DETERMINING BEST VALUE FOR PURCHASES OF AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS. "Best value" for purposes of this chapter means the lowest overall cost of an automated information system. In determining the lowest overall cost for a purchase or lease of an automated information system under this chapter, the commission or a state agency shall consider factors including:

(1) the purchase price;

Ok I think OSS has this one.

(2) the compatibility to facilitate the exchange of existing data;

This could definately be a problem. Depending on how the agencies' data is stored, especially since the assumption is that they are currently using Closed Sourse Software, it may be difficult to get the data out!.

(3) the capacity for expanding and upgrading to more advanced levels of technology;

I would definately argue OSS can win this one hands down.

(4) quantitative reliability factors;

I hope that by this they don t mean a report published by a software company about its reliability--because I don't remember the last time I read one of those for my OSS programs.

(5) the level of training required to bring persons using the system to a stated level of proficiency;

Doh... No matter what anybody says, this is my main gripe about most OSS software that I have used. Except for some exceptions, documentation is difficult to find, and User Interfaces were not well thought out. I think most OSS developers feel that once their software functions as they think it should, they stop! Again, maybe I have just had some bad experiences, but it seems like 90% of the OSS software I use falls under this description.

(6) the technical support requirements for the maintenance of data across a network platform and the management of the network's hardware and software;

Obviously OSS has this one beat.

But the bottom line is that they agencies are only being told to do a TCO analysis before choosing software and that they have to consider OSS as well. Here is the real problem though. The person doing the TCO can do the analysis any way they want. So if somebody wasn't using OSS before, then when they go to anaylze the price/cost benifits they will simply use data that supports what they want to use.

correction: the hearing was on a substitute bill

[chip rosenthal]

I am Sheriff of the EFF-Austin Open Source Posse and coordinator for our efforts on SB 1579. I want to offer some quick corrections to what is being discussed.

The main problem is that a lot of people are discussing the content of and materials about the bill as originally introduced. In the legislative process, that is often an initial bid just to get the discussion going. It is not uncommon for bills to be amended--or even completely substituted--as they go through the process. That is what has happened here.

Sen. Carona, the author of SB 1579, offered up a complete substitute. It has been accepted by the committee, replacing the original text. Therefore, the bill as originally written is off the table.

The article links to my report on the committee hearing. In that report you'll find the complete text of the one-paragraph substitute, along with the reasons why EFF-Austin supports it.

The substitute is significantly less sweeping in scope than the original. It is still valuable, and it is a great opening to see more open source in Texas government. In Thursday's hearing Sen. Carona stood strongly behind this bill, and stated that he planned to be back next legislative session with even stronger measures.

Our wiki page has been updated with the latest information on SB 1579. Our sb1579 mailing list (subscribe directions on the wiki page) is the best way to stay informed on this particular issue.

Thanks to everybody who has supported the effort to promote open source software in Texas state government.