Re: [Fsfe-uk] NHS OSS paper?

[Graham Seaman]

Thanks both!

Mark Preston wrote:

> Hi all,
> Like Phillip says there are quite a few versions.
> Go to http://web.archive.org and type
>
> http://www.nhsia.nhs.uk/text/pages/features/i_250202.asp
In fact all the versions seem to be the same - some quick diffing shows 
the changes are just in the wayback machines internal links (apart from 
someone adding a webtrends tracker at some point).

> into the search box.
>
> Regarding the current page where it states:
>
>
>       "What is the issue of reliability and performance with Open Source?
>
> Open Source code typically comes without ownership, support or 
> maintenance. NHS infrastructure and information systems are critical 
> to the delivery of quality care and therefore guarantees on the 
> reliability and future maintenance of systems are required.
>
> No policy decision has yet been made by the Department of Health or 
> OGC to nominate a designated guardian for Open Source code across the 
> NHS."
>
> This is just spin. I didn't know Microsoft and other closed source 
> companies were now giving guarantees to this effect. Most of the 
> click-through software license agreements I have ever read were more 
> disclaimers than guarantees. At least with an open source program you 
> get the source code. Most end-users never get the source code if the 
> software company goes bust, even if they have source code escrows. 
> What the hell gives the DoH the right to nominate a "guardian" for 
> Open Source code across the NHS? I suppose it's the same as the right 
> for the NHSIA to be the guardian of white papers that discuss "Open 
> Source Software and the NHS"
Is it just me that's starting to feel that this isn't just a contest 
between proprietary and open source, that the whole procurement and 
government policy making process is fundamentally corrupt?  How much 
does accenture get a year from us?

Graham

Philip Hands wrote:

> >