NASA Prepares to Open Source Code

comforteagle writes "According to this story at O'Reilly, NASA is looking for approval for their own open source license. The NASA submitter (lawyer of course) states that none of the current licenses meet their needs, but more interesting is that NASA needs a license at all. It makes one wonder what we, and other space agencies, might see coming out off NASA. It's also nice to see code that taxpayers paid for anyway being released for their use too. There must be at least one slashdotter who could dream up a use for NASA software. X Prize participants maybe?"

Comments

Absolutely

[BWJones]

There must be at least one slashdotter who could dream up a use for NASA software.

Absolutely there is. I can think of a number of potential applications of NASA image processing software to our research in neuroscience. Right now, we are having to either purchase code written for the GIS markets to do what we want, custom write routines in a language such as IDL, or get some computer science graduate students to work for us custom creating code. We are doing the first two and I am going to start recruiting CS grad. students next week, but things might go a lot faster if we already had a source code base to start with.

Re:Absolutely

[mog007]

That's easy:

void mars_lander()
{
int dist;

dist = to_ground(position,z); /* dist = dist * .3048
* let's see what happens when we comment the
* conversion!
*
/ /* Someone please uncomment that before we compile... --Tim*/

land(dist);
}

Re:Absolutely

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, for all of you out there who are in this position...

Please contact a NASA center and start asking around about doing joint research. NASA has a lot of research funding that requires joint work with a university, but you've got to hook up with the right researcher to get it. Every NASA center has an office that will help you find the people most likely to help you.

Believe me, if you need that image processing code and you are a university, a joint research agreement will get you a lot of help. If you need some other kind of code, and you think NASA has it, start calling around! It may be a bit of work, but you'll be surprised how eager many NASA researchers are to work with you.

NASA, eh?

[Faust7]

Jeez, who's next, Microsoft?

Re:NASA, eh?

[CeleronXL]

Well no, Microsoft isn't next, Microsoft was before this. ;)

Do it now!

[Rope_a_Dope]

I am most having got need for rocket open source. Now do open source me want for get. Sincerely, North Korean Military

RE: NASA Prepares to Open Source Code

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, Microsoft already did so earlier today, so NASA is a bit behind the times for this one. [wink]

Sweet!

[hcetSJ]

I've built this six-wheeled golf cart in my back yard, and I was hoping to find a good OS for it!

space agencies in other countries too?

[xot]

with me being in another country,would i be able to use the [OPEN] source code for my government space agency? Would the US govt permit that, nasa being a govt agency.
They would probably only release code which would not benefint most people don't you think? ;-)

Not limited to space applications, by any means!

[Robotbeat]

NASA's first "A" stands for "Aeronatics", and that's only part of their name. Lots of applications can be thought of. For instance, the source for their 3d ranging application would be very beneficial to many people. I mean, the rovers are able to compute their surroundings in 3d using only 2 cameras. The degree of success and repeatability of these 3d measurements far exceeds any other available 3d ranging software. This type of code could be useful for anyone who wants to make a 3d model of something using only a camera and some precise alignment. Indeed, JPL has a lot of experience in robotics and the gain in knowledge when such code is released is sure to be great for anyone in the field of robotics. Even the Darpa robot competition would be different with such technology freely available.

Maybe now...

[twoslice]

We can have more success at landing spacecraft on Mars. At least the metric/imperial error would have been caught before it went to alpha...

Home NASA project?

[micromoog]

There must be at least one slashdotter who could dream up a use for NASA software. X Prize participants maybe?"

Darwin Award, maybe?

When's it coming out?

[AhBeeDoi]

I hope NASA gets their Open Source software out soon. I'm getting thoroughly frustrated trying to write an OS for my planetary rover.

Sweet!

[teamhasnoi]

I've been itching to get my hands on NASA's Photoshop filters since 1969!

Imagine a Beow...

[qtp]

Nasa seemed happy releasing code under the GPL for quite some time, and I find it odd that that is changing now.

Ever use a network card under Linux, much of the networking code came from NASA (mostly from Donald Becker).

Still dreaming about that Beowulf cluster? That also came out of NASA.

Perhaps the lawyers felt left out, so they're trying to do thier part and look useful. Why would NASA find that a license that has served them well for years needs replacing? Any lawyers opine on the new license yet?

Re:Government Copyright

[Anonymous Coward]

You are basicaly correct.

U.S. Code Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 101:

A "work of the United States Government" is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties.

and from Section 105:

Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.

Although I will say that NASA seems to act like it owns the copyright on the images it produces.

Good imaging software

[Kurt Gray]

I get the impression that NASA develops a lot of software for image processing. I'm picturing some really powerful GIMP plug-ins... "Make Mars Red", "Color Galaxy", "Add UFO"....

About time

[Adam_Trask]

I have collaborated with NASA scientists, and you would be surprised how difficult it is for me (not being a NASA employee) to get the code written on NASA machines, even for the same project! They have to go thru a lot of (and i guess, agonizing) paperwork before they release any NASA-grown software. It has been easier for me (and them) to reinvent the wheel more than once at my lab.

For those wondering about the software produced, they employ folks from all branches of knowledge. Except finance, me thinks.

Re:Government Copyright

[Anne_Nonymous]

Yup. Just go the NSA website and download your own copy of Echelon, citizen!

Nothing new...

[vistas]

For over 30 years NASA code was available through a program called COSMIC which was administered at the University of Georgia.

http://www.cosmic.uga.edu/

In fact for awhile they operated out of one of the many buildings previously occupied by the 40 Watt Club

Since 1998 the code has been available through the Open Channel Foundation

http://www.openchannelfoundation.org/cosmic/

Re:Government Copyright

[Sepodati]

They are public domain unless there are security reasons to not release the code. I just went through this with a program I wrote for DOD. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), you can request the source code to any program. Not saying they'll approve it, but unless there are "national security" type reasons, they should. In order for me to get a copy of my program to continue to develop and distribute on my own, I had to do a FOIA request on myself. :)

---John Holmes...

This is not open-source

[jmv]

(expanding a bit on my earlier comment)
I've read the license quickly and I can definitely say that section 3F will cause problems. Requiring registration does not meet the open-source definition, nor the Debian free software guideline. It discriminates people who either 1) do not have access to the Internel (the "desert island" test) 2) people who can't say they are using the software (the "chinese dissident" test). It also prevents any inclusion in a distribution because it implies that merely buying a Linux distribution that includes the software requires you to register it. If you forget, you are breaking the law (just imagine if all software was released under this license).

Last thing, by requiring registration, this license seems to cover the *use* of the software, going even further that what copyright law requests. The GPL gives you rights that copyright law alone does not give you (e.g. right to redistribute the code), but it does not *remove* rights (line the right to use the software without telling anyone). This also means that to be valid, the license would actually have to be signed (hence it becomes a contract). The GPL (or other free software licenses) does not require that since it only gives you additional rights (if you don't agree to the GPL, you still have all rights provided by copyright laws).

Re:Government Copyright

[djcinsb]

But I'm sure there are some private contractors somewhere along the line, and so what about their software?

That is exactly the point here. I'm working as a contractor on one of the pieces of software that started this effort. Basically, we'd like to release the software as open source so that we can get universities and others involved in the project, but still retain some level of control over it (and get some free publicity at the same time).

The goal isn't to keep others out of the process -- it's to get others involved, while making sure the final software product is of high quality. After all, if the software you're building is being used to fly spacecraft, you want to be sure it gives accurate answers.

NASA/USGS Image Processing Software

[dsoltesz]

This is probably the package you are looking for: Integrated Software for Imagers and Spectrometers. It's been distributed freely for many years, and is, indeed, public domain. It's funded by NASA for use by NASA-funded researchers and the planetary science community in general.

Note, Isis 3.0 has not been released yet, look for the beta in coming months - look at Isis 2.1 for the stable release. Download/Install instructions are on this page: Isis 2.1 Installation Guide.

Automatic mosaicking is generally done using the spacecraft positioning information. Automatic registration? It doesn't exist (yet). Registration involves varying levels of human intervention, and when some level of automation is achieved, it's mission-specific and under special circumstances. Isis is primarily a cartographic package - IDL is generally used for statistical work.

Another image processing package that's public domain is USGS MIPS. It's a (non-NASA) terrestrial image processing package that evolved from the same roots as Isis, so you'll find it has many of the same capabilities.

I don't know what other NASA packages there might be out there like this, if there are any. I'll ask around.

Re:space agencies in other countries too?

[grozzie2]

take the ISS for example. Because we have to keep it in a particular orbit to satisfy the Russians,

The reality of the situation is, the iss orbit is not where it is to 'satisfy the Russians', it's to satifsy the laws of physics. There are two ways to achieve an on orbit rendevous, the first is to go charging up to orbit, and then later maneuver the orbit to match that of the target. This can be hugely wasteful in terms of energy expended in maneuvering. The second method is to wait for the target object to be on an overhead pass, so that a pure ballistic trajectory can take you directly from launch to the on orbit rendevous. This is the most efficient method of launch, allows the maximum payload delivery for a given launch vehicle.

The ISS orbit is determined by simple ballistics. It's where it is to provide maximum availability of direct launch windows from the Kennedy Space Center AND the Balkinor launch facilities. With shuttles all parked in the garage, I suspect there's a lot of folks at nasa today that are quite thankful for the decision to place ISS in an orbit that provides equal accessibility for the Soyuz and Progress vehicles. With no shuttle missions bringing up the groceries, it's very important that those progress launches pack in every possible pound of payload when they do get sent up.

Like everything else in life, ISS decisions are often a big compromise, most compromises are driven by physics, others by politics. To many uninformed folks, much of the decision making driven by physics appears to be political, because they dont understand the reality of the situation. Orbit selection for ISS was not chosen to 'satisfy the russians', but to optimize availability of resources in many scenarios. Lack of shuttle availability was one of those scenarios, and today it's reality. The ISS orbit is skewed a little from optimum shuttle inclinations due to the lifting capacities of the progress vehicles. With 20/20 hindsight, this was a brilliant decision. At the time, it appeared political to americans. It wasn't, it was driven by the need to have contingencies available in the event of prolonged periods of unavailble shuttles. We are currently a year into one of those periods.