Since it's OT I suggest that any discussion (on Ubuntu lists anyway) go on in "sounder".
I found an interesting (but older) exchange between a Peruvian Congressman and a GM for Microsoft regarding Peru's attempt at creating an OSS law. I don't know whether Peru adopted it or not, but the points raised are extremely interesting -- there's a compelling argument to be made (most of us Linux users already know this but it's not usually articulated this clearly) that an elected government can ONLY use OSS and stay true. http://www.opensource.org/docs/msFUD_to_peru.php http://www.opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php FYI this is my favourite tid bit: You end with a rhetorical question: "13. If open source software satisfies all the requirements of State bodies, why do you need a law to adopt it? Shouldn't it be the market which decides freely which products give most benefits or value?" We agree that in the private sector of the economy, it must be the market that decides which products to use, and no state interference is permissible there. However, in the case of the public sector, the reasoning is not the same: as we have already established, the state archives, handles, and transmits information which does not belong to it, but which is entrusted to it by citizens, who have no alternative under the rule of law. As a counterpart to this legal requirement, the State must take extreme measures to safeguard the integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility of this information. The use of proprietary software raises serious doubts as to whether these requirements can be fulfilled, lacks conclusive evidence in this respect, and so is not suitable for use in the public sector. _______________________________________________ yellowdog-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.terrasoftsolutions.com/mailman/listinfo/yellowdog-general HINT: to Google archives, try '<keywords> site:terrasoftsolutions.com'
