Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Report Advocates Switch to Open Source

Posted by michael on from the don't-have-to-be-a-rocket-scientist dept.

vortimax writes "A new technical report from the NASA Ames Research Center advocates the adoption of Open Source Software internally by NASA for some projects. The paper also proposes modifications to NASA's "external software release" policies to allow OSS and proposes the use of the Mozilla Public License as the license of choice for NASA software."

10 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. International Collaboration by Ikeya · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's good to see this kinda thing start to happen. I feel that space exploration is humanity's job as a whole. What a great way to promote all humanity contributing to the space exploration effort than by contributing source code. Granted, I know this doesn't mean it's all gonna be done open source-like, but hey, it's still cool and in a way, allows everyone to participate.

    ikeya

    --
    ---- Move SIG...For great justice!
  2. My open source contribution to NASA by product+byproduct · · Score: 5, Funny

    double Feet2Meters(double feet)
    {
    return feet * 0.3048;
    }

    1. Re:My open source contribution to NASA by krog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Again, in Ada please.

      --
      Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
    2. Re:My open source contribution to NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      Dear Employer,


      Upon review, I have decided not to accept your rejection. I will be reporting to work on Monday.

  3. So... by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...is it "GNASA" now?

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  4. Isn't government owned software public domain? by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought the government couldn't copywrite anything. Or does NASA not count?

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Isn't government owned software public domain? by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here we go


      Publications Incorporating U. S. Government Works

      Works by the U. S. Government are not eligible for U. S. copyright protection. For works published on and after March 1, 1989, the previous notice requirement for works consisting primarily of one or more U. S. Government works has been eliminated. However, use of a notice on such a work will defeat a claim of innocent infringement as previously described provided the notice also includes a statement that identifies either those portions of the work in which copyright is claimed or those portions that constitute U. S. Government material.

      Example: © 2002 Jane Brown. Copyright claimed in Chapters 7-10, exclusive of U. S. Government maps

      Copies of works published before March 1, 1989, that consist primarily of one or more works of the U. S. Government should have a notice and the identifying statement.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  5. Not a wholesale switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a remarkably balanced report for a government. It advocates a mix of internally developed and external software, including both open source and proprietary software, depending upon the situation.

    You'd think this was a pretty obvious take, but far too often government processes are hijacked by either open source zealots or commercial interests. Leaning in either direction can cause great technical difficulty and cost to the public.

    Keep in mind that NASA has no great software policy, but a huge amoung of software in place. A policy to ensure consistency and fairness over much of the existing software uses could have great advantages in efficiency for the organization. Of course, what you think of the existance of NASA in the first place or its usefulness in its current form is up to you...

  6. in other news... by Beatbyte · · Score: 5, Funny

    43 more moons were discovered orbiting Jupiter. All of which are now named Firebird.

    --
    Get paid to code OSS
  7. Getting tools open sourced from NASA by owenomalley · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I work at NASA/Ames as a senior software engineer in the Automated Software Engineering group and I reviewed Patrick's report a month ago. Patrick's report is the result of his efforts to convince management that it would be a good thing to release the scientific computing software that he had written to the public.

    I am in a research lab working on software engineering tools and most of us would love to release the tools that we develop as Open Source. Unfortunately, we need to get the administration's support. (We've been trying for over a year on a software model checker named Java Path Finder and haven't had any luck yet.) We have other stuff like an C++ AST language model (in XML/Java) that we are currently developing that would also be nice to release.

    I can understand the administration's desire to keep the software ownership for itself, but the greater good would be for us to release the tools under GPL. Especially, since the opportunities for commericialization are much more limited than they were a few years ago. Releasing the tools as Open Source would make them available to many more people and dramatically increase the impact of the work. A further complication was mentioned in the report is that we have a lot of contractors (~40%?) and the IP ownership is determined by the particular contract. *sigh*

    We also use a lot Open Source code, including linux, x11, xemacs, ssh, gcc, cvs, etc. and it would be nice to give something back to the community.