Standards Review and Recommendation Publication
SRRPUB09
Open Source
March 10, 2006 V2.0
The Department of Information Resources (DIR) issues Standards
Review and Recommendations Publications (SRRPUB) as guidelines
for Texas state agencies and institutions of higher education.
Executive Summary
The United States, European Commission, and other nations
have started addressing the use of Open Source solutions in
public sector and e-government applications. Many of the applications
used in government could be obtained and improved using the
Open Source model (e.g., registration, licensing, certification,
permitting). This should support purchasing best value solutions
and removing the reliance on an individual information technology
vendor.
In June 2004, the Government Open Code Collaborative (GOCC) was established as a voluntary collaboration between
public sector entities and non-profit academic institutions. The GOCC was created for the
purpose of encouraging the sharing, at no cost, of computer code developed for
and by government entities where the redistribution of this code is allowed. The Department of Information Resources (DIR) has joined the GOCC and recommends that other Texas agencies and universities consider joining. Additional information is available on the GOCC Web site. Prior to
a Texas agency donating code to the
GOCC repository, they must fully comply with the GOCC Operating Agreement, that in part requires the following:
- The Donated Code fully complies with all licenses governing the use of such software.
- The agency has diligently researched and documented the history of its ownership of the donated code.
- The donated code is open code as that term is defined in the GOCC Operating Agreement and therefore legally available for distribution.
- The agency has had legal counsel review the due diligence performed and conclusions reached prior to placing the code in the repository.
Agencies should consider Open Source solutions in information
technology procurements, and the criteria for selecting a
specific solution should be based on best value. Agencies
should use products that support open standards and specifications
in all applications. Agencies should consider obtaining full
rights to the software code it procures wherever this achieves
best value.
Implementation, technical information and additional resources
for specific areas addressed in this guideline may be found
in the following:
Section on International Open Source
Initiatives
Section on the Open Source Definition (OSD)
Section on Best Value
Web page with Open Source Resources
and Solutions
Web page with Sample Language to
use in an RFO
National &
International Open Source Initiatives
In October 2000, the President's Information Technology Advisory
Committee (PITAC) published
"Developing Open Source Software To Advance High End Computing."
In the report they define "Open source" as "a generic
term for software that is intended to be distributed to
anyone who wants it, possibly under certain conditions determined
by a licensing agreement. With the explosive growth of the
Linux open source operating system over the last several
years, the term has become increasingly commonplace. Two
critical characteristics of open source software are:
- Access
to source code: Source code is distributed along with executable
binaries. This access allows users to modify, study, or
augment the software' s functionality.
- Any licensing agreement
must allow distribution of the initial software and
redistribution of that software in modified form.
Common examples of open source licensing agreements include
the General Public License (GPL) developed by Gnus Not Unix
(GNU) and the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD a.k.a. FreeBSD)."
The report identified two key issues that also apply to state
government, the lack of inventories of open source projects
is an obstacle to development efforts and that government
should allow open source development efforts to compete on
a level playing field” with proprietary solutions in
government procurement.
The European Commission published an Open Source Software (OSS) plan that indicated the "European Commission and Member States will promote the use of open source software in the public sector and e-government best practice through exchange of experiences across the Union." Additional information is available on current open source software activities in the European Information Society.
The United Kingdom Open Source Software (OSS) policy published
in 2002 identified four key areas to justify the use of
OSS:
- purchasing best value for money solutions
- removing the
reliance on individual IT suppliers
- providing more flexibility
in the development, enhancement and integration of systems
- vesting
the ownership of bespoke and tailored software code
with Government.
The United States Federal Government has established the Component Organization and Registration Environment (CORE) Web site as a place to search for and locate specific software components. The CORE initiative grew out of the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Project Management Office,
the goal of which is to support cross-agency collaboration, transformation and
government-wide improvement. For additional information visit https://www.core.gov
In December 2001 the National Electronic Commerce Coordinating
Council (NEC3) published
an Exposure Draft "Application Sharing: Best Practices and
Lessons Learned," that included the following:
"There are many services that are conducted by government
that have similarity. They cross over all areas of government,
education, health and human services and business services.
There is a litany of processes known as registration, licensing,
certification, permitting throughout the social services
and business area of government. There are another set of
processes that fall under the area of filing including taxes,
claims, records, and forms. Surrounding all the processes
and functions are several renewal requirements and the need
for duplicates of government documents. There is a high
level of repetitive operations in these processes and portions
that are very similar.
The government is working diligently on saving money and
trying to make the best use of resources. It is clear that
there is an opportunity for sharing applications, information,
objects, components and other development work products.
There are many obstacles and impacts to be taken into consideration
in the area of application sharing."
The Open
Source Organization has developed the Open Source Definition
(OSD) that addresses the following key areas:
1. Free Redistribution -The license shall not restrict any
party from selling or giving away the software as a component
of an aggregate software distribution containing programs
from several different sources. The license shall not require
a royalty or other fee for such sale.
2. Source Code - The program must include source code, and
must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled
form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with
source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining
the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction
cost–preferably, downloading via the Internet without
charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which
a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated
source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the
output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
3. Derived Works - The license must allow modifications and
derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under
the same terms as the license of the original software.
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code - The license may
restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form
only if the license allows the distribution of "patch files"
with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program
at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution
of software built from modified source code. The license may
require derived works to carry a different name or version
number from the original software.
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups - The license
must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor - The license
must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in
a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict
the program from being used in a business, or from being used
for genetic research.
7. Distribution of License - The rights attached to the program
must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without
the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product - The rights
attached to the program must not depend on the program's being
part of a particular software distribution. If the program
is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed
within the terms of the program's license, all parties to
whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights
as those that are granted in conjunction with the original
software distribution.
9. The License Must Not Restrict Other Software
For the official and most current version, along with the
rationale, for each area visit http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
In July 2002 the PESO Working Group discussed OSS on the
list and at the monthly meeting. The discussion included:
- Open Source Technologies
- Public Accountability
- Security, Support, and Training
- Available Open Source Solutions
- Open Source Initiatives within Government Agencies
- Success Stories of how Various Agencies have used Open Source
Best Value
Best Value is addressed in the Texas Administrative Code as
follows:
§ 2157.003. Determining Best Value for Purchases of Automated
Information Systems "Best value" for purposes of this
chapter means the lowest overall cost of an automated information
system. In determining the lowest overall cost for a purchase
or lease of an automated information system under this chapter,
the commission or a state agency shall consider factors including:
(1) the purchase price;
(2) the compatibility to facilitate the exchange of existing
data;
(3) the capacity for expanding and upgrading to more advanced
levels of technology;
(4) quantitative reliability factors;
(5) the level of training required to bring persons using
the system to a stated level of proficiency;
(6) the technical support requirements for the maintenance
of data across a network platform and the management of the
network's hardware and software;
(7) the compliance with applicable Department of Information
Resources statewide standards validated by criteria adopted
by the department by rule; and
(8) applicable factors listed in Sections 2155.074 and 2155.075
§ 2155.074. Best Value Standard for Purchase of Goods
or Services
(a) For a purchase of goods and services under this chapter,
each state agency, including the commission, shall purchase
goods and services that provide the best value for the state.
(b) In determining the best value for the state, the purchase
price and whether the goods or services meet specifications
are the most important considerations. However, the commission
or other state agency may, subject to Subsection (c) and Section
2155.075, consider other relevant factors, including:
(1) installation costs;
(2) life cycle costs;
(3) the quality and reliability of the goods and services;
(4) the delivery terms;
(5) indicators of probable vendor performance under the contract
such as past vendor performance, the vendor's financial resources
and ability to perform, the vendor's experience or demonstrated
capability and responsibility, and the vendor's ability to
provide reliable maintenance agreements and support;
(6) the cost of any employee training associated with a purchase;
(7) the effect of a purchase on agency productivity;
(8) the vendor's anticipated economic impact to the state
or a subdivision of the state, including potential tax revenue
and employment; and
(9) other factors relevant to determining the best value for
the state in the context of a particular purchase.
(c) A state agency shall consult with and receive approval
from the commission before considering factors other than
price and meeting specifications when the agency procures
through competitive bidding goods or services with a value
that exceeds $100,000.
§ 2155.075. Requirement to Specify Value Factors in Request
for Bids or Proposals
(a) For a purchase made through competitive bidding, the commission
or other state agency making the purchase must specify in
the request for bids the factors other than price that the
commission or agency will consider in determining which bid
offers the best value for the state.
(b) For a purchase made through competitive sealed proposals,
the commission or other state agency making the purchase:
(1) must specify in the request for proposals the known factors
other than price that the commission or agency will consider
in determining which proposal offers the best value for the
state; and
(2) may concurrently inform each vendor that made a proposal
on the contract of any additional factors the commission or
agency will consider in determining which proposal offers
the best value for the state if the commission or other agency
determines after opening the proposals that additional factors
not covered under Subdivision (1) are relevant in determining
which proposal offers the best value for the state.
Recommendations:
1. Agencies should consider OSS solutions in IT procurements.
2. The criteria for selecting a specific solution should be
based on best value.
3. Agencies should use products that support open standards
and specifications in all applications.
4. Agencies should consider obtaining full rights to software
code it procures wherever this achieves best value. Draft
of sample language to use in an RFO.
5. Agencies should consider joining the GOCC (http://www.gocc.gov).
Address your questions about the Texas Information Technology
Standards Web pages to: DIR Standards and Architecture
|
