Alliance

parent FfiiSk Last 20.01.2006 12:46 CET

Jan Husar:

European Open Technology Alliance / EOTA

cec-alliance@oss.cz

short description of Alliance

The main reason for founding the Open Technologies Alliance is to improve support to all existing Open Technology communities and create a friendly platform for effective deployment and use of open source software in our countries. In short, it is sort of top-level management for the communities and the upcoming projects created by or in cooperation with them. For example, we will provide consultations to local governments, public relations, re-form or form new projects, which later will become part of bigger projects (localization platform). The paramount reason of supporting Open Technologies (Open Source, Open Standards and Multi Platform software) is to take advantage of the great benefits its usage brings. For example, we need Multi Platform software for framework or middleware deployment, because there are no equal opposites for framework solutions such as Microsoft's ActiveX solution in Open Source, which are mainly used in government or educational sectors. Explaining the reason for using Open Standards is redundant at this point.

EOTA Definitions

The OpenSource Initiative (OSI) approved license for software, which means freedom to use, redistribute and modify the source. Free as in the word “freedom.

Any proprietary software using Open Standards like the Open Document Format (ODF) for office applications such as IBM Workplace or Sun StarOffice.

Software which can be accessed from any platform by using plugins or software with open API access. Proprietary or Open software able to run on any platform on server and client side (such as JAVA which is as client available at any platform accessible by PlugIns), or software which is able to run in this environment (such as Cloudscape DB, SAP,...)

EOTA pilot projects

This part should be subdivided into more subsections, and as everything, it is open for discussion. We should stick to supporting communities so we get more support and supporters, which will cater for efficient actions in the field in which we operate.

Some projects were renamed and moved to different development platform for certain reasons. We are looking forward to test those projects in other EU countries.

The major problem of FOSS solutions deployment is their translation. First of all, we must have this software translated and after that we can offer some solutions based on it. Right now in SKOSI (Slovak Open Source Initiative) we are trying to beta-test a new localization platform solution based on subversion/cvs, PO sync and Pootle l10n. This localization platform offers great benefits, normally it can work with translation PO files (which is the core translation for all the translations in all FOSS software), but there is more to it. Platform is capable to translate FOSS PO files, as well OpenOffice.org and Mozilla suite translation files. Webtranslation benefit is easy understandable and accessible web solutions enabling people without any technical skills to do the translations themselves. People just need to know how to use a web browser; it can be any web browser because Pootle system will be W3C compatible over the next year (2006). With this solution, we can offer improved and more efficient translating solutions for any FOSS based translations to any language. There should be no problem of including other translation projects into our localization platform because we still have the PO files solution, which is used in any upcoming translations in the FOSS world. This means we are offering efficient translations and we are trying to involve more people into those projects, because there are no technical skills required.

OpenTranslation project research and development, donation needed

OpenClassroom in first stage of living will be teaching benefit, or better say teaching IT room for any highschool in slovakia. Currently we are planning one demo (workshop room) for showing purposes. Solution is based on Edubuntu and ubuntu linux. Right now, there are two unix engineers parttime working on this project and we don't have money resources to keep the development (hardware) and guys (provision) in better shape.

OpenClassroom will have also infrastructure server for online services of school, now there is planned webpage(CMS), teaching calendar and class scheduling, emails, online teaching materials and the benefit of all this (OpenClassroom software) the students can take all the software home for free and use it.

In march we are planning workshop meeting with 50 highschools in slovakia which are interested of implement OpenClassroom as teaching and IT infrastructure benefit to their school.

OpenClassroom Research and Development, donation needed (up to anyone) OpenClassroom "workshop" conference, marketing materials (400eur).

Case studies of successful implementations of the FOSS software in our member countries, any government, education, business or private sectors. Through this, we can publish all the studies as our web presentations, make easy templates how to do them, and it should be our task to create them. Those templates should help us doing it more easily and propose some new implementations to government and education sectors.

Info coming soon Basically, it consists of information, training and certification of people. I had a long discussion with the OSA UK (Open Source Academy/United Kingdom) about getting more FOSS and Open Standards technologies into the ECDL. Supporting FOSS in ECDL is a key issue, as all EU member countries are taking ECDL with Microsoft Technologies, which means Microsoft made steps to support only their technology and certification in the governmental and educational sectors. This issue should be discussed with more members who have more experience in the field of certification in government and education sectors.

As I said before, all projects should be part of larger projects. As an example, I would mention project cooperation within EOTA (Open Technology Alliance). FOSS approval should be individual for each member country (Belgium, Czech Republic, etc...). There should be some definitions, which will shape the approval. Firstly, it would be efficient to use FOSS software translated into a respective member country language (should be part of localization platform? discussion?). FOSS approval (stamp not certification) will mean this software is ready to use in your country (member countries of OTA) in any sector where you want to deploy it, we will not take on any responsibility for it that is why it is called approval and not certification. Certification would mean we bear responsibility for the software, which we will not. Any further points of FOSS approval software are subject to discussion.

This point is mainly about lobbying and convincing governments to adopt directives which are friendly towards using the Open Standards Software. For example, an issue with the FOSS software deployment is directives and use of proprietary software standards such as Microsoft's Office application standards, which are mainly forcing self-governments, companies and governments to use only the proprietary software (which operate on proprietary standards only). My advice is to make friendly proposals to using open standards, such as “Ok, you can use your proprietary standards, but when somebody (educational, self-government or business sector) asks for documents in open standards files you should make it available so they can use any software they want (software using open standards such as openoffice.org or IBM workplace). This was just an example of proposal; I think we should stick to this “philosophy” of friendly open standards environment where the government itself is following their constitution about freedom of choice which has been abused lately in some EU countries including outside the EU.

EOTA international support

As I stated before, the projects should be taking the friendly and open way to cooperate within the communities. On the other hand, we should have proposals, organise meetings and discussion with the European Commission, European Parliament, etc. First of all, we must understand that the people in the organisations have no idea about the technologies that are being widely used in our member countries or within the EU. Our work should be transparent. That means, we must clearly table what we have done so far, what we are doing and what we are planning to do. This should help us in being independent. No matter what the funding. This is mainly about the web portal presentation and keeping the public well informed about the steps we are taking or trying to take.

It seems many communities, companies and people are going to support our movement, and this requires a democratic approach. A logical follow-up will be forming some kind of OTA parliament, which can summon people bearing increased responsibility and also shape its “philosophy”, and unite any other groups within which can represent some ideas or projects.

EOTA national support

National support is one of the key issues of OTA. In the beginning, we need our responsible members (country members) to form some kind of support in national terms. A good example is SKOSI or OSS Alliance CZ. That means connecting all possible nodes within one country. A case study on this aspect will be specified later. These “groups” (SKOSI, OSS Alliance CZ, etc...) should represent the objectives of OTA (as I said OTA is only a working name) in national terms. First objective is to connect all nodes, which means bringing the existing communities under one umbrella (which, hopefully, will form later the OTA parliament so the members can discuss the steps we are taking or we want to take).

EOTA international foundation

From the beginning of OTA’s existence we will have a “parliament” and the board formed from national support groups (such as OSS alliance cz or SKOSI) which will represent the decision-making component. Later, we can attempt forming an OTA parliament. This point is subject to discussion.

EOTA first proposal (being currently under heavy discussion)

As mentioned before, all the things we need to do, all the steps we need to take or logical. I have been working on this for the last six months, and so far, I have been able to convince many decision makers that what we are doing is the best. I will also provide my reports of the work I done during my travels.

prospective members and supporters

International Groups:

Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (ffii.org), Free Software Foundation Europe (fsfeurope.org), OpenOffice.org, Ubuntu Linux Community in different countries, OpenDocument Fellowship.

meetings and hearings on Alliance

jan husar:

help needed

as always ;)

Hosting sponsored by Netgate and Init Seven AG