Open Source Discussion Group
Wednesday, October 24 10:30 a.m. - 11:20 a.m.
Hot Topics Discussion: Open Source: Mirage or Reality?
• John F. Walsh, Associate Vice President, Enterprise Software, Indiana University System
Is your campus using or considering open/community source as part of your application portfolio? If so, what are the forces driving the adoption? Are the decisions tactical or strategic in nature? What challenges do you face? What are the benefits to the campus? Discuss the issues, share experiences, and learn from your colleagues.
Notes:
Example of a school that has gone “all the way”: Rider University, John LeMasney
Examples discussed: ZOPE/Plone = application server/content management system; Sakai, Moodle, Kuali
Why do?
-You want to customize, contribute
-Stability (Apache doesn’t go down!)
-Spend $100K on a LMS, or spend that on something else?
-Proprietary nature of programs is limiting
-Free from the constant upgrade cycle (it was pointed out that especially in community source products you really don’t get away from this, although you won’t usually have time pressure to do it right now)
When large, non-educationally based firms take over a product (Like Oracle did PeopleSoft), you may have no leverage, you’re not important to them
What to consider?
-Risk factors: who would I sue?
-Is the code clean? Some approaches: Kuali has made efforts to ensure that i.p. trail is clean with a contributer license agreement; Michigan State had code analyzed by 3d party to be sure it was OK to use—at least showed due diligence
-Community source (e.g., Sakai, Kuali) vs. Open source: php does have holes, maybe community source is cleaner? Others felt that there was very little difference.
-RFP process puts open source products at a disadvantage? But now there are companies who are responding with open source products so that they can be chosen (rSmart; also redhat is an actual vendor, responsible for support and there are also LINUX performance expertise consultants who can help) Group sees a rise in for-fee 3d party support, but you still won’t have licensing fees.
-You should put the time, money you save in development into documentation as a contribution back
-View of major (unnamed) company speaking recently to Mr. Walsh: “licensed software market is dead or dying”
-Yes, you do need financial, HR support for these projects, but “having 'the best' isn’t going to make you a great research university”, so why pay to license?
-Sustainability is an issue: it is risky to “own” it, recommend not doing one-off customizations unless contributed back, but still easier to manage even if you do than if you’ve customized a proprietary system.
-Accessibility: “community source” is directed development, so maybe more accountability? You don’t get modifications accepted if they aren’t going to work, won’t be in shipped version without going through q/a. Features are driven by the community, not by profit motives.
-How to convert faculty? Teaching and learning products need community of support to quickly fix problems, especially at beginning of term when most problems occur. This is actually true no matter what you are using—really it is change that is the problem, if converting to open source, need “cortez-like moment”, we’re going forward no matter what! What about migrating old content? May not be an option.
-Watch out for: development of Microsoft “shared” LMS on Share point—never underestimate them!!
Hot Topics Discussion: Open Source: Mirage or Reality?
• John F. Walsh, Associate Vice President, Enterprise Software, Indiana University System
Is your campus using or considering open/community source as part of your application portfolio? If so, what are the forces driving the adoption? Are the decisions tactical or strategic in nature? What challenges do you face? What are the benefits to the campus? Discuss the issues, share experiences, and learn from your colleagues.
Notes:
Example of a school that has gone “all the way”: Rider University, John LeMasney
Examples discussed: ZOPE/Plone = application server/content management system; Sakai, Moodle, Kuali
Why do?
-You want to customize, contribute
-Stability (Apache doesn’t go down!)
-Spend $100K on a LMS, or spend that on something else?
-Proprietary nature of programs is limiting
-Free from the constant upgrade cycle (it was pointed out that especially in community source products you really don’t get away from this, although you won’t usually have time pressure to do it right now)
When large, non-educationally based firms take over a product (Like Oracle did PeopleSoft), you may have no leverage, you’re not important to them
What to consider?
-Risk factors: who would I sue?
-Is the code clean? Some approaches: Kuali has made efforts to ensure that i.p. trail is clean with a contributer license agreement; Michigan State had code analyzed by 3d party to be sure it was OK to use—at least showed due diligence
-Community source (e.g., Sakai, Kuali) vs. Open source: php does have holes, maybe community source is cleaner? Others felt that there was very little difference.
-RFP process puts open source products at a disadvantage? But now there are companies who are responding with open source products so that they can be chosen (rSmart; also redhat is an actual vendor, responsible for support and there are also LINUX performance expertise consultants who can help) Group sees a rise in for-fee 3d party support, but you still won’t have licensing fees.
-You should put the time, money you save in development into documentation as a contribution back
-View of major (unnamed) company speaking recently to Mr. Walsh: “licensed software market is dead or dying”
-Yes, you do need financial, HR support for these projects, but “having 'the best' isn’t going to make you a great research university”, so why pay to license?
-Sustainability is an issue: it is risky to “own” it, recommend not doing one-off customizations unless contributed back, but still easier to manage even if you do than if you’ve customized a proprietary system.
-Accessibility: “community source” is directed development, so maybe more accountability? You don’t get modifications accepted if they aren’t going to work, won’t be in shipped version without going through q/a. Features are driven by the community, not by profit motives.
-How to convert faculty? Teaching and learning products need community of support to quickly fix problems, especially at beginning of term when most problems occur. This is actually true no matter what you are using—really it is change that is the problem, if converting to open source, need “cortez-like moment”, we’re going forward no matter what! What about migrating old content? May not be an option.
-Watch out for: development of Microsoft “shared” LMS on Share point—never underestimate them!!
posted by Elizabeth at 3:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home