[PLUG] Another Gov't see's the light

[Auke Kok]

Auke Kok wrote:
> Rich Shepard wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Lancashire, Pete wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33120
>>
>>   It's probably the newspaper, not the Croatian government who has 
>> confused
>> open source software with open standards. But, that's common.
> 
> My croatian is pretty nonexistent but the referred PDF is definately 
> about Open SOURCE - specifically - open source programs, not open 
> document formats. Any folks from .hr out there that can verify this?

From:

http://see.oneworld.net/article/view/136616/1/3260

Croatian Government Adopts Free Software Policy in State Administration

Tomislav Domes
18 July 2006

Last week, on July 12, the Government of Croatia adopted an official document 
titled Directions for Development and Use of Open Source Code Computer 
Programmes in Bodies and Institutions of State Administration. In the 
document, the Government accepts the responsibility to develop, prepare and 
procure open-source software solutions in the development of information 
systems of state administration bodies.

This policy is motivated, according to the document, by the fact that 
proprietary software leads to great dependence on suppliers, which can damage 
the market competition. Furthermore, open source programmes increase the 
transparency of administration’s work and free access to information. 
Ultimately, the document states that the use of open source based solutions 
will reduce the unjustified budget spending and strengthen the domestic 
information science industry.

In addition to its fine argument on the need to introduce free software in 
administration, the document lists ten directions and recommendations for 
future government action in that area. Although the directions don’t offer 
concrete requirements and quantities (for instance, the targeted share of open 
source software solutions), as well as deadline for implementation, but they 
do introduce clear imperatives that can, in the worst possible case, be used 
as strong advocacy basis.

===

how far this is gonna go is a riddle to us all, but I'm sure such a document 
makes lots of campanies very nervous :)

Cheers,

Auke