3 ms·
I work on a contract for the VA, which includes open-source repos [1] for VA.gov's frontend + backend systems. We work closely with USDS [2], who has been a hug
by gunsch 6y ago
I work on a contract for the VA, which includes open-source repos [1] for VA.gov's frontend + backend systems. We work closely with USDS [2], who has been a huge ally in advocating for doing our work in the open, including our project management. It seems like GSA does a lot of similar advocacy work, though I haven't interfaced with them directly.
One interesting thing we've run across is that Public Domain source code is not considered "Open Source" in terms of OSI licensing [3]. This isn't usually relevant, but has blocked use cases like software services offering free use for OSI-licensed projects.
(To other readers: If you're interested in chatting about working on modern, open-source projects in the federal space, drop me a note! Email in profile).
[1] https://department-of-veterans-affairs.github.io/va.gov-team/ https://department-of-veterans-affairs.github.io/va.gov-team..., repository links at the bottom
[2] https://www.usds.gov/ https://www.usds.gov/
[3] https://opensource.org/node/878 https://opensource.org/node/878
- dimmke 6y agoHey, I just sent you a connection request on LinkedIn. Definitely interested in learning more about your open working experiences. I'm really surprised that they're also including project management with that.
- robocat 6y ago> Public Domain source code is not considered "Open Source" in terms of OSI licensing https://opensource.org/node/878 https://opensource.org/node/878 The reasons look to more nuanced than that article (especially for government work) but the crux AFAIK is that public source is not a license, so there is no license that the OSI can approve. From https://opensource.org/faq#public-domain https://opensource.org/faq#public-domain : There are certain circumstances, such as with U.S. government works as described above, where it is not easy to apply a license, and the software must be released into the public domain. In these cases, while it would be inaccurate to display the OSI logo or say that the license is OSI-approved (since there is no license), nevertheless we think it is accurate to say that such software is effectively open source, or open source for most practical purposes, even though it is not officially released under an open source license. (This is assuming, of course, that in the laws of releasing jurisdiction the meaning of "public domain" is compatible with the Open Source Definition.) After all, the freedoms guaranteed by open source licenses are still present, and it is possible for the familiar dynamics of open source collaboration to arise around the software.” The next FAQ heading explains that the CC0 license was not OSI approved due to its patent clause. Public source does have its issues with some jurisdictions, but surely jurisdiction problems are no worse than the specific problems each other license has.
- infogulch 6y agoMaybe publish under the user's choice of public domain, CC0, and MIT?
- Reelin 6y agoThis is the VA we're talking about, so they can't do that unless congress changes the law. All works produced by direct employees of the federal government (ie not contractors) are in the public domain. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_works_by_the_federal_government_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_works_by_t...)
- pabs3 6y agoOne other issue with the public domain and the USA govt is that while US govt works are public domain in the USA, they can, at the same time, be copyrighted by the US govt outside of the USA. So public domain in the USA but proprietary outside of the USA.