Rafael MorenoDepartment of Geography and Environmental Sciences

GIS in the Rockies 2016

Denver, CO September 21-22

Dave MurrayCity of Westminster

Facilitators and Inhibitors for the integration and use of

FOSS4G in the geospatial science and technology arena

Presentation Organization

1.Presentation of some points regarding the facilitators and inhibitors for the introduction and use of FOSS4G.

2.Dave Murray presentation of specifics in a city and county context.

3.Contributions and feedback from the audience.

Several of the resources used in this presentation can be found in:

• References at the end of these slides.

• Moreno-Sanchez, R. 2012. Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial applications (FOSS4G): A mature alternative in the geospatial technologies arena. Transactions in GIS 16(2): 81-88 http://geospatial.ucdenver.edu/foss4g/home-2

• Brovelli, M., M. Minghini, R. Moreno-Sanchez, and R. Oliveira. Forthcoming. Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial Applications (FOSS4G) to support Future Earth. International Journal of Digital Earth

• 127 links to FOSS4G resources and samples of large sophisticated applications.

• 92 references to literature.

Facilitators and Inhibitors for the introduction and use of

FOSS4G

(Ideas based on work by: Giera and Brown 2004; Valimaki et al. 2005; Woods and Guliani 2005; Moreno-Sanchez et al. 2007; Morgan and

Finnegan 2007; Viorres et al. 2007; Meeker 2008; Ellis and Van Belle 2009; Hauge et al. 2010; and Nagy et al. 2010)

Referenced in:

Brovelli, M., M. Minghini, R. Moreno, and R. Oliveira. Forthcoming.Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial Applications (FOSS4G) to support Future Earth. International Journal of Digital Earth

Inhibitors

a) Lack of awareness of software existence, relevance, or successful implementations in large, sophisticated, mission-critical applications.

b) Shortage of technical knowledge needed to implement and use FOSS4G.

c) Organization has a favorable arrangement with a private/proprietary/closed-code vendor (e.g. discounts; training or support).

d) Big/expensive prior investments in private/proprietary/closed-code software infrastructure.

e) Staff (students?) resistance due to fear of being deskilled if using FOSS4G instead of commercial packages.

f) Shortage of providers, expertise, and traditional support.

Inhibitors

g) Hidden costs (e.g. training and configuration; premium professional support?; need to dedicate resources to community participation).

h) Limited time GIS managers or faculty have to keep up with developments in both arenas private/closed-source software and FOSS4G.

i) Perception that FOSS4G “is not suitable for real, sophisticated, mission-critical applications”.

j) Perception that there no technical support for the software use and development.

k) Perception that “how good could it be if it is free”.

l) Misinterpretation of “free” Free = Freedom.

Inhibitors

m) For certain applications and contexts, legal, licensing, and copyright issues are important and sometimes are poorly understood. (see http://www.bswd.com/CNSV-1304-

Saper(IP-SIG).pdf)

n) Perception that FOSS/FOSS4G is less secure than proprietary/closed software.

See following short resources:https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/awareness/security-concerns-open-source-software-enterprise-requirements-1305

http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/Open-source-software-security

http://www.zdnet.com/article/six-open-source-security-myths-debunked-and-eight-real-challenges-to-consider/

7 reasons not to use FOSS http://www.cio.com/article/2378859/open-source-tools/7-reasons-not-to-use-open-source-software.html

Payne, C. (2002). On the security of open source software. Information systems journal, 12(1), 61-78.

Hoepman, J. H., & Jacobs, B. (2007). Increased security through open source. Communications of the ACM, 50(1), 79-83

Cowan, C. (2003). Software security for open-source systems. IEEE Security and Privacy, 1(1), 38-45.

Von Krogh, G., & Von Hippel, E. (2003). Special issue on open source software development. Research Policy, 32(7), 1149-1157.

Wheatley (2004) provides examples that help dispel the following myths: http://www.cio.com/article/2439780/open-source-tools/open-source--the-myths-of-open-source.html

• “The principal attraction is its no-cost”• “The savings are not real”• “There is no tech support”• “It is not for mission-critical applications” • “FOSS is not ready for the desktop”• “It can’t be that good if it is free”• “It is difficult to learn”• “It is only for programmer/developers”• “ There are no learning materials or books about

them”.

Facilitators

a) Availability of FOSS4G-literate personnel.

b) Top administration support for FOSS4G.

c) Existence of a committed FOSS4G in-house champion(s).

d) Limited financial resources ensure FOSS4G consideration.

e) FOSS4G can help bridge countries’ and organizations’ “cross-border” technological and budgetary disparities and facilitate cooperation.

f) Tight collaborations with professionals in the private and public sectors developing and using FOSS4G cutting-edge applications.

Facilitators

g) Research, development and service activities that might be limited by license agreements or cost.

g) Distribution of in-house developments or research results and technologies to partners and end users that don’t have access to private/closed-code software.

h) Research or systems development that benefits or requires access to source code.

g) Emphasizing to students (and administration) the importance of not being unidimensional (one set of software), being adaptive and a quick learner.

h) Emphasizing the importance of exposure to other software and systems to highlight principles and education over training.

References on FOSS/FOSS4G in Higher Education:

van Rooij, S. W. (2009). Adopting open-source software applications in US higher education: A cross-disciplinary review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 682-7http://www.unomaha.edu/lms/documents/adopting_opensource_AERA.pdf

Birchall, A. J., & Hopkinson, A. (2007). Open source software in higher education. http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/6305/1/birchall_hopkinson_OSS.pdf

Abel, R. (2006). Best practices in open source in higher education study: The state of open source software. http://www.citeulike.org/group/2518/article/791631

Williams van Rooij, S. (2007). Perceptions of open source versus commercial software: Is higher education still on the fence?. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 433-453 http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ768886.pdf

van Rooij, S. W. (2007). Open Source software in US higher education: Reality or illusion?. Education and Information Technologies, 12(4), 191-209. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.8829&rep=rep1&type=pdf

References FOSS/FOSS4G in Higher Education…..

Liu, C. (2005, May). Enriching software engineering courses with service-learning projects and the open-source approach. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering (pp. 613-614). ACM. http://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/42.pdf

Courant, P. N., & Griffiths, R. J. (2006). Software and collaboration in higher education: A study of open source software. New York: Ithaca. Retrieved January, 30, 2009. http://www.campussource.de/opensource/docs/OOSS_Report.pdf

Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K. R. (2003). Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy, 32(7), 1217-1241. http://flosshub.org/system/files/rp-vonkroghspaethlakhani.pdf

Daniel, J., West, P., D'Antoni, S., & Uvalić-Trumbić, S. (2006). eLearning and Free Open Source Software: the Key to Global Mass Higher Education http://dspace.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/1428/2006_Daniel_eLearning_Open_Source_Transcript.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y