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

simple as 1,2,3

[OffTheLip]

Boot cdrom format load linux

Spreadsheet in XLS

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone else find the humor in the spreadsheet being an XLS file? I figure if the target audience is a group of people who use MS products, then they'll have no problem opening that XLS file.

Re:Spreadsheet in XLS

[fredrikj]

Just checked it, seems to work fine.

Re:Spreadsheet in XLS

[beacher]

Other links in the pdf -
1. The OSS Fact Sheet
2. The Report on OSS usage
3. The Report on market structure and issues related to public procurement
All three of the above documents can be found here in other formats as well as PDF.
-B

Re:Spreadsheet in XLS

[jpetts]

Anyone else find the humor in the spreadsheet being an XLS file?

Oh, what a wasted opportunity! You could have said it was ironic, end been the very first person ever on Slashdot to have correctly made that assertion!

Eeeeek

[devphil]

I'd feel better about these "how to transition your project to open source" guidelines if the first step weren't

1. If you don't already have one, get an account on sourceforge.net.

Okay, okay, just kidding.

Step one...

[dankdirk77]

Step one... stop bending over

Step two... remove Microsoft "probe"

*FREEDOM*

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!

Re:Step one...

[xanadu-xtroot.com]

but last I checked, it's *nix only.

But you've said that you're getting away from Win*. Isn't a worthy *NIX client what you're looking for?

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.

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.

Wow great guide

[bogie]

I'd really suggest you download the pdf before commenting. It's really quite a piece of work. In fact it looks like it might be the most comprehensive guide yet written on how to migrate to opensource. This is good stuff.

Armed with this and of course google and you'd be way ahead of the curve in planning or evaluating a migration to opensource.

Kudos to the authors.

Re:Wow great guide

[Otter]

Agreed, that there's a lot of useful information in it.

On the other hand, encouraging the notion that there's some special hurdle in "migrating" to open source strikes me as counterproductive. For the most part, it's a matter of changing software. Switching from one MTA to another is pretty much the same thing regardless of the licensing of the new package. I don't quite see the value in making it out to be some sort of religious conversion or lifestyle change.

Re:Wow great guide

[Deusy]

It's really quite a piece of work. In fact it looks like it might be the most comprehensive guide yet written on how to migrate to opensource. This is good stuff.

Yeah, riiiiiiiight.

The first thing I do with any of these 'migration' things is to flip straight to the bit on groupware since that is the single most difficult piece of the puzzle to place; especially document management and scheduling.

What does this paper say? I paraphrase: "Er... well... there's no real option other than web-based groupware although there's Kroupware that we have yet to evaluate."

Really... you could have fooled me!

Then the comments on document management are that the only project they know of is no longer actively maintained.

They really didn't look very hard! (And that's not the only option.)

Really, when I see that they gloss over possibly the most important (read: least known) parts then I'm anything but impressed.

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."

Opportunity knocks

[rsborg]

This is a pretty comprehensive study(tho one imagines that it could get out of date pretty quickly). One thought that came up was, what about the areas in the article where OSS comes up short? For example, from the article:

11.6.2. Personal databases held centrally or locally
Ad hoc personal databases are not well supported in OSS. There is no direct equivalent to Access, nor is one being developed. Several of the groupware packages do offer some capability in this area using a variety of OSS SQL databases as a back-end. In some cases (such as NullLogic) ordinary users can only use pre-defined queries. Some offer the ability to define forms that can be used to store and access data.

Is there someone who could either rebut this statement, or would want to work on a replacement? Yes, Access sucks and is the bane of any data-warehousing project... but it's utility is the reason there are so many small but completely critical .mdb files out there.

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.

Re:Opportunity knocks

[am 2k]

SQLite is an open source (even public domain!) personal SQL-capable database. It lacks some features (like types other than strings and some SQL commands), but it's very useful for embedded databases.

Re:Opportunity knocks

[Yarn]

Openoffice 1.1 has a rudimentary DB interface. It needs work, but a graphical query design (similar to access's) is there already. The backend can be any odbc or jdbc database, as far as I can tell.

Re:Opportunity knocks

[whereiswaldo]

Not me, amigo, but as a consultant, I can't count on my two hands the number of times I've had to either warehouse data from, or (worse) interface with an existing Access database.

Funny, when I was in college, I was told over and over again that MS Access was a solution to be touted to customers. While we were taught Oracle, Access was great for small businesses and non-profit organizations.
Now that I know better not to use Access, I can think of a bunch of alternatives that I would rather use. Access is not a multi-user-friendly system.

Error in instructions

[rhombic]

Don't you think step two should precede, rather than follow, step one? I mean, ouch...

Re:Error in instructions

[PetiePooo]

Don't you think step two should precede, rather than follow, step one? I mean, ouch...

Now that's just deeply disturbing!

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:Looks interesting...

[petermdodge]

Unless I misread the FreeBSD license it only stipulates three things: 1) this software is freely distributable and you can do what you want with it, 2) you can't remove any copyright notices or the like and 3) no one is responsible for the code. Freer even thant the GPL.

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).

I wonder why...?

[SoSueMe]

Perhaps they are going this way because of poor language support, among other things.

Here's a possible example:

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.

They have been developed with guidance from public sector IT experts from Denmark, Finland, Italy, Germany, Malta, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Turkey.

If you look at the details of MS Bulletin ms03-045 you see the patch has problems with third party apps in the languages:

Brazilian, Czech,Danish, Finnish, Hungarian, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish.

Six of the eight authoring countries are on the troubled patch list.

Perhaps Isreal is not the only country they pissed off once too often.

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.

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??

Re:Holy shit, has anyone tried the spreadsheet

[murple]

The Problem seems to be that it doesn't transfer the values from the summary sheet to the other. So in sheet 'Migration' they still use the 4000 user value, so training costs are a bit higher.

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:Funny, but I disagree.

[ingenuus]

Furthermore, irony, being defined as contrary to expectation, is subjective: what I expect may be different from what you expect. Therefore, I would say that every use of the word "irony" could in fact be accurate if the situation is contrary to what that particular person expects.

So, while I do not think it was ironic, I believe you did (i.e. it was contrary to your expectation, as erroneous as I feel that expectation may be :)), and therefore you used the word accurately.

Re:Spreadsheet in XLS - not the only flaw

[passthecrackpipe]

While on the face of it the report looks good, deeper reading reveals some serious flaws, besides the fact that the spreadsheet is in XLS format.

First of all, the report is factually incorrect in several areas. Netproject list the City of Turku as a case study, but the City of Turku turned out to be a turkey - they only used OSS as a driver for microsoft to lower rices, which they did, and Turku is now a well publicised MS case study. Not very clever to use that as advertisement for an OSS migration. The one thing PA officials do is check out case studies. It get numerous facts wrong about some of the software packages, and on the whole looks more like parroting of populist stances (exim is better and faster then postfix, for example) then real-life testing. At the very least, they should back these type of statements up with facts.

Secondly, this is so full of OSS politics, it is not even funny anymore. Take for example this little gem: "Of the session managers KDE's is the more mature but Gnome is catching up fast. Gnome is being supported by Sun Microsystems and members of the Gnome Foundation. netproject considers that it has a better architecture and believes it has a better future.". That initself should be the subject of a fine little flamewar..... Also, there are, again, no facts to support the supposition of a "better" architecture. Also, SUSE, for example, get very little to no airtime in the document, and the document is simply wrong about some of the issues discussed around SUSE. for example, the YAST discussion is plain wrong, and some highly popular prducst, such as openexchange, get no mention whatsoever. Granted, some components of SLOX are closed source, but that doesn't stop the authors from mentioning and even recommending other closed source products.

Finally, and perhaps the worst flaw of all, is the fact that despite its size, it is simply a (badly researched) list of products. This is not a HOWTO migrate, this is a list of "if you migrate, use these tools". There is no methodology, no method, not *system* to migrate. This is organisational masturbation, a big "look how l33t we are" kind of thing.

I can spend some more time ranting about this, but will be to no avail. It is published, and undoubtedly, many fools will brandish this as the final word in ridding the world of the closed source software scourge. To all our detriment......