Keith, Government is one big machine. However at the presentation of this paper, the people at MITA were the same people who were pushing it from within and this paper finally gave them the bureaucratic go ahead to take on certain projects using OSS without being dismissed outright based on the software license rather than on merit. I would pass on the names of the people I spoke to, but I forgot their business card at home. Ramon was there and might remember the name.
Mind you, there is still a catch all statement within the paper that basically allows anyone to veto an open source product because the proprietary software chosen cannot be replaced or for any other reason actually. my 2c On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Keith Vassallo <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Thanks for this! > > Of course, what one should realise is that neither the government nor many > of the MITA people actually want open souce. It's just that some people in > important places now have businesses selling open source solutions - some of > which are being pitched at government tenders. So of course MITA can't keep > it's Microsoft centric policy if these tender proposals are to go through. I > know this not from heresay, but from very reliable people in the know and > some conferences/seminars organised by MITA & the interested parties which > I've attended in various capacities. > > Excuse me for being negative, and i hope I'm wrong, but I hardly think OSS > is being "pushed" through MITA based on technical benefits and cost savings > in the public sector. More likely, it's the safeguarding of private > interests, as usual. Then again, I will gladly bite my tongue if I'm wrong - > and if the result is more OSS in government... then who cares how it got > there? > > Regardless, well done for the response Andrew - I wouldn't change a word > myself. > > K > > On 30 Nov 2010, at 11:06, Andrew Cilia wrote: > > Hi Guys, > heard nothing from you so i went it alone. I know there was much more > to be said but it's a start. I've attached it here should you be interested. > > > > ------------------------------ > The information contained in this email is confidential and may be > privileged. It is intended for the addressee only, if you are not the > intended recipient please notify the sender and delete the email > immediately. The contents of this email must not be disclosed or copied > without the senders consent. > We cannot accept any responsibility for viruses. > Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, > except where the sender specifically states them to be the view of Philip > Toledo Limited. > <open.pdf>_______________________________________________ > > MLUG-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://linux.org.mt/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-list > > > > _______________________________________________ > MLUG-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://linux.org.mt/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-list > >
_______________________________________________ MLUG-list mailing list [email protected] http://linux.org.mt/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-list
