On 5 November 2013 16:43, A. Mani <a.mani.cms at gmail.com> wrote:
There is nothing specific about free software in the document.They always miss the point :P
There are serious differences between the idea and implementation of
free software and open source
which are particularly relevant in the context of this document. Do see
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
for relevant details.
The only concern for OSS seems to be 'reduced cost'. As far as "free
software" is concerned, the people drafting the document seem to
interpret "free" as "gratis" instead of "free as in freedom" (p.39).
Nothing is said about security models, openness of information,
knowledge commons and transparency of processes - that can be the
outcome of free software adoption.
Why does the document say so little about funding free software projects?
The document propagates FUD of proprietary software developers in
regard to free software licenses like GNU-GPL. It should be required
that all software developed by the Government must be under GNU-GPL-3
and above or Affero-GNU-GPL in special cases. GNU-GPL-3+ remains the
best license for almost all use cases including commercial ones. For
more on licenses see
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html and
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html ;.
Non copy-left
licenses should not be tolerated. They eventually amount to infringing
on people's fundamental rights.