EU Publishes Open Source Migration Guidelines

Skunil writes "The IDA Open Source Migration Guidelines provide practical and detailed recommendations on how to migrate to Open Source Software (OSS)-based office applications, calendaring, e-mail and other standard applications. These guidelines have been designed to help public administrators decide whether a migration to OSS should be undertaken and describe, in broad technical terms, how such a migration could be carried out. They are based on practical experience of a limited number of publicly available case studies, and cover a wide range of management and technical concerns."

Comments

Finally a step in the right direction

[Pan T. Hose]

Now if only they were talking in the terms of Free Software instead of merely Open Source I would be sure that they are indeed motivated by our freedom and not only technical superiority of GNU. But I am sure that it is only a matter of time until the Freedom ideals are widely recognised in EU parlament. This is a step in the right direction. There are other steps which must follow.

Not just for migration...

[line.at.infinity]

OSS advocates should also advocate to businesses that are just starting up and households that are just purchasing their first PC.

It would make more sense to start fresh with free software rather than to switch after paying for proprietary software.

Short form

[ENOENT]

Here is the short form for deciding whether migration to OSS is appropriate:

1. Are you OK with a foreign company having complete control of your data?

Answers:
Yes -- Continue using MS products.
No -- Switch.

I didn't see ..

[MisanthropicProggram]

any reference to a list of applications that could be substituted for the proprietary stuff. I would like to see something like:

Windows ..... Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD,etc.

MS Office ....... OpenOffice, ????

Outlook, OulookExpress ...... ???? you get the idea.
Unless you know what the OSS version's name is, you wouldn't know what to replace it with.
I don't know what all the OSS replacements are, if there are any, or what functionality they have (haven't). This would greatly help someone trying to migrate. Otherwise, I'm afraid, they'll just throw up their hands, and say,"I don't know where to start."

Why don' t you at lease scan through it,

[Idou]

before bashing it?

First of all, it is for EU agencies. Using this material to back up your decisions might be the difference between a promotion and getting fired if you work for such an organization. This is important for the audience it was written for.

Also, if you are into migrations to OSS, you might find some useful information, regardless of its target audience.

Anyway, the FASB is as bureaucratic as the EU and their publications are much more boring, but as a CPA I hang on every word they publish and so should anyone working in the accounting field, throughout the world. This is not about inspiring people, it is about setting standards, which is not as entertaining as the former but is just as important.

Personally, I think it is great for ANY institution to write on this subject, especially when it has a degree of objectivity on the subject. Many of the "case studies" that this was based on have never been published, so this adds additional observational information on the subject, at the very least.

Re:Opportunity knocks

[Anne Thwacks]

small but completely critical .mdb files out there

You have critical data in .mdb files? Either you have nerves of steel, or the brain of a jellied eel.

The second short form

[yerricde]

The first dozen pages of the document that I read tell how to make such a switch. So here's the second short form:

Do you want to be branded a political failure in the switch?

1. Yes
2. No

If you chose 2, switch gradually, one system at a time, starting with the least-critical systems and the systems farthest away from direct interaction with users. Once you get to the users, switch their interfaces one piece at a time, starting by introducing Free Software that runs within the existing proprietary framework (examples include Mozilla and OpenOffice.org products for Windows OS).

commmon sense advice for IT managers

[forgetmenot]

I think the most important section of that whole document is 7.3, which I lovingly think of as the "condom section" - common sense steps to protecting yourself when you're in a relationship with a beast. Face it - for whatever reasons, many IT managers are loathe to leave the Microsoft cradle and make the jump to OSS. But 7.3 is practical common-sense advice about how not to dig a bigger hole than one you're in.

Re:Step one...

[Trinition]

On the contrary:

Step 1. Give me open source alternatives I can wean myself into one at a time on my current platform (Windows XP).

Step 2. Now that all of my apps are open source, give me an open source operating system alternative where I can run them all.

For example, I'm now running OpenOffice.org instead of Microsoft Office. Well, almost. I still use Microsoft Outlook because I can't find a competitive PIM client (not e-mail client) for Windows. I had hopes for Evolution, but last I checked, it's *nix only.

If you really want to know how to get people to switch to open source, stop thinking people want to uproot their whole history and experience in one fell swoop. Its very disruptive and uncomfortable.

If you rip that "probe" out too quickly, it will hurt!

Holy shit, has anyone tried the spreadsheet

[jubalj]

The excel tool looks pretty cool so i opened it up under openoffice and tried the following values:

Intenal desktop: 20
Home desktop: 1
users: 20
Sites: 1
Years of propriety upgrade: 3

Cost of propietory works out to be: 48,364 for the fist year.
Cost of FOSS (1st yr): 40,462

Now the shocking big:
Total cost of migration for the first year:
4,095,925 (thats 4 million euros!!) for 20 computers! [hardware:10,925; Software: 2480000, People:160500]

wait a minute.. was this funded by microsoft??

Funny, but I disagree.

[ingenuus]

In fact, I would expect it to be in an MS format since the document (I assume) is about _how_ to migrate from MS to Open Source. Putting it in some Open Source format would be ironic, because, then how could those using MS possibly read it and thereby learn how to migrate?

Irony occurs when the conveyed meaning is contrary to expectation or the literal meaning.

Re:Step one...

[Trinition]

Yes, but gradually and comfortably. If open source guys could focus on cross-platform stuff, it would be a smoother transition. I could switch out my PIM now, for example, and take it with me when I'm ready for the Linux plunge. At least compatible data formats.

Apache is a good, but simple example. I mean simple in that they didn't have to tackle the whole user front end.

Re:Step one...

[pHDNgell]

Yes, but gradually and comfortably. If open source guys could focus on cross-platform stuff, it would be a smoother transition. I could switch out my PIM now, for example, and take it with me when I'm ready for the Linux plunge. At least compatible data formats.

We open source guys aren't working for you. Personally, I have no interest in writing any software to make people's lives any better when they're on Windows. If you want this, you do it.

I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but you're talking about free software. If your only contribution is telling them that you want them to go through extra effort to make sure their software works in Windows, I doubt you'll get far.