1	Bringing open source to Ohio campuses: Meeting common goals through shared solutions Scott E. Siddall Denison University This presentation at http://siddall.info/talks/
2	Roadmap What is open source software? The culture of open source Leadership of open source projects The common needs of education
3	Build-Buy-Borrow Build your own? Bear all the development costs Provide all your own support Buy? Share development costs with others, plus a vendor profit Pay for support from vendor Borrow (open source)? No licensing costs, or share the costs Provide your own support, buy it, get it from the community
4	Open source is a licensing model Open Source Initiative 55 licensing models GNU Public License (GPL) applies to 40,000 projects at Sourceforge GPL, BSD, Mozilla, MIT are all popular
5
6	Open source is more than a licensing model “When programmers can read, redistribute, and modify the source code for a piece of software, the software evolves. People improve it, people adapt it, people fix bugs. And this can happen at a speed that, if one is used to the slow pace of conventional software development, seems astonishing.” The Open Source Initiative http://opensource.org
7	Types of open source software Central services and infrastructure Email systems, servers, network management tools Desktop operating systems Linux, Sun Java Desktop Web applications ePortfolios, portals, course management, digital asset management, collaboration and communication tools “Open source is moving up the stack” - Brad Wheeler, Indiana University
8	Contentions OSS costs less than proprietary software OSS licensing is easy OSS is more reliable, fewer bugs OSS can be customized OSS is more secure OSS is better because it uses open standards OSS is by and for a community Proprietary software has better support OSS is difficult to install, distribute, migrate to OSS avoids vendor lock-in OSS reuses software elements efficiently Proprietary software developers have better resources
9	“The Cathedral and the Bazaar” Every good work of software starts by scratching a developer's personal itch. Good programmers know what to write. Great ones know what to rewrite (and reuse). When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to hand it off to a competent successor. Treating your users as co-developers is your least-hassle route to rapid code improvement and effective debugging. Release early. Release often. And listen to your customers. Given a large enough beta-tester and co-developer base, almost every problem will be characterized quickly and the fix obvious to someone. The next best thing to having good ideas is recognizing good ideas from your users. Sometimes the latter is better. - Eric S. Raymond, 1997
10	The Culture of Open Source Complex software development By loosely coordinated developers and contributors In an informal meritocracy software specifications are rarely written continuous design instead virtual project management a gentle hierarchy
11	Need for leadership “People think just because it is open-source, the result is going to be automatically better. Not true. You have to lead it in the right directions to succeed.” - Linus Torvalds
12	Community Source Purposeful coordination of work within a community Based on the principles of open source development A greater reliance on Defined roles Responsibilities Funded commitments In between the cathedral and the bazaar Caveat: production of software versus catalyzing a community
13	POLL If your institution confronts obstacles to greater technical innovation, what are they? A - Resource limitations B - Culture rooted in traditional processes C - Aversion to risk D - Discomfort with change E - Leadership F - Other issues….
14	Is the open source model successful? “Free and open-source software development is faster, better and cheaper in building a community and at reinforcing and institutionalizing a culture for how to develop software” Walt Scacchi (2004) Institute for Software Research UC Irvine
15	Our business officers are being encouraged…
16	Where do our institutions stand? Most are tracking OSS developments Most agree: higher education should create software to meet our unique needs Most see interoperability as important as OSS licensing Few have any official strategy on OSS A few don’t use OSS now Why? Costs, lack of support, no accountability, too busy, immature OSS, no resources to shift to OSS
17	Where do our institutions stand? Of 118 respondents that do use open source software: 73 use open source software for mission critical applications 66 use open source software in the academic enterprise 63 have experimental uses of open source outside of CS/engineering departments 56 use open source apps and provide feedback to developers 39 contribute resources toward open source development 33 have employees that contribute to open source development on their own time 26 have distributed their own homegrown applications How are they using OSS? 106 in servers, databases and infrastructure 82 in desktop operating systems 61 in curricular or collaborative applications 26 in desktop and administrative applications
18	Practical recommendations Examine the entire cost Licensing, hardware, support, training, documentation, migration from legacy tools Ask why you are considering any application Are learning outcomes the driver? Pilot the software Directly involve all stakeholders; consider outsourcing the pilot Start with “low hanging fruit” – not mission critical applications Understand and plan for support needs Spend avoided licensing costs on local staff development Keep looking – new opportunities arise each week
19	POLL Do you feel your institution is ready to undertake a project that relies on open source software? A – Yes B – No C – Don’t know
20	Future of the software market We share unique software requirements Education is a tiny piece of the global software market place Who will create our software, at what cost? Will we have to craft our own software? What will be the impact of software development by for-profit education?
21	Common needs of education …..but we have the resources Learning and research are our core competencies, our products – this is strategic! IHE are centers of research in software development A diverse, capable and open community: doctoral/research, masters, baccalaureate, associates, K-12
22	Consortial piloting in Ohio
23	Limited scale pilot programs Fully engage faculty and students as well as technical staff in evaluations Co-source (partner with a support entity) then focus on learning and teaching Collaborate: minimize the reinvention of wheels
24	POLL How important is it to our institutions that we design and create our own software to support learning? A – Crucial B – Important C – Neutral D – Unimportant E – Bad idea
25	Resources - Articles "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric S. Raymond, 1997. “A Second Look at the Cathedral and Bazaar” by Nikolai Bezroukov, 1999. In First Monday. Altruistic individuals, selfish firms? The structure of motivation in Open Source software in First Monday by Andrea Bonaccorsi and Cristina Rossi “Open Source 2007: How did this happen?” by Brad Wheeler “Open Source CMS Pilots” by Scott Siddall. March, 2004. “Socio-technical interaction networks” by Walt Scacchi, 2004. “Using Open Source for Strategic Advantage” by Alfred Essa (EDUCAUSE Live! Session, April 2004) “Update on Westwood and Chandler for Higher Ed” by Scott Siddall. An Open Mind on Open Source by Karla Hignite. In NACUBO’s Business Officer magazine, August 2004. Open Source under the microscope by Paul Festa, 2004. C/NET News. Universities Offer Homegrown Course Software by Jeffrey Young, July 23, 2004. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
26	Resources – Web sites Technical glossary related to open source Sourceforge - “the" open source software development site listing more than 85,000 open source projects The Open Source Initiative – promotes the definition of open source Open source research at the Institute for Software Research, UC Irvine EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research research bulletin, “Aligning IT Strategy to Open Source, Partnering and Web Services.” Nov. 2003.
27	Return to home