On Dec 15, 2009, at 9:36 AM, sankarshan wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Amol Hatwar <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> How to kill these two birds with a single stone, proactively? Well, a 
>> central software/productivity clearance center can be set up. The job is to 
>> help state governments spec out requirements minus the software packages 
>> required. If the idea is to build a bridge, governments have no business 
>> saying whether it has to be a suspension, cable-stayed, girder etc. The 
>> design and solution in question has to "evolve" from situational and other 
>> needs. Also, success stories of already implemented solutions can be put up 
>> and circulated. Copy pasting already working solutions (with customizations) 
>> will not only save time and money - but the saved budgets can be used to go 
>> the next level of productivity and software enhancements.
> 
> Unsurprisingly enough, the NIC does have within its charter to do
> exactly as you state above. And, it has officers who do so. The
> unfortunate part is that the sporadic efforts at FOSS within NIC(s)
> are aimed at re-inventing the wheel instead of forming a project forge
> which can be used across state deployments or, deployments of
> functional similarity.

I was looking at NIC, but my previous interactions with them haven't at all
been fruitful. Last time I had a talk with them, they refused to open the source
of even the most simple and basic applications. Well, something needs to
be done...

Cheers,

Amol Hatwar
_______________________________________________
network mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in

Reply via email to