Compare commits
2 Commits
96fa68c6bc
...
395357b86f
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 395357b86f | |||
| 7f190ce811 |
169
news/2023/news-20230921-01.en.xhtml
Normal file
169
news/2023/news-20230921-01.en.xhtml
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,169 @@
|
||||
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
|
||||
<html newsdate="2023-09-21">
|
||||
<version>1</version>
|
||||
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Sovereign workspace openDesk: German Ministry of the Interior provides answers</title>
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
|
||||
<h1>Sovereign workspace openDesk: German Ministry of the Interior provides answers</h1>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>The German Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) and the public IT
|
||||
service provider Dataport are working on administrative workspaces to
|
||||
enable digital sovereignty. But are both products Free Software? How
|
||||
are they related? We asked the BMI and publish the answers here.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<figure class="no-border">
|
||||
<img
|
||||
src="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/medium/80/55/3fc43813d932a3a95f7a233e2f76.png"
|
||||
alt="Image showing a computer with the dphoenix suit on it" />
|
||||
</figure>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>In June, the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) sent a catalogue
|
||||
of questions to the BMI about its “Sovereign Workspace” project. <a href="/news/2023/news-20230606-01.html">Our
|
||||
questions</a> covered the relationship between the BMI workspace and Dataport's
|
||||
dPhoenixSuite, the funding of both projects, and the availability of
|
||||
their respective source code.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>New developments: openDesk code available, dPhoenixSuite still
|
||||
proprietary</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Some weeks later, the BMI released the first source
|
||||
code of its workspace suite as Free Software on openCoDE, the code
|
||||
repository for public administration. According to extensive
|
||||
documentation, the release is an alpha version, with the first
|
||||
operational release planned for later this year. The documentation
|
||||
states that the suite will be released entirely under Free Software
|
||||
licences and will include modules such as Univention Corporate Server,
|
||||
Collabora Online, Nextcloud, OpenProject, XWiki, Jitsi and the Matrix
|
||||
client Element. Extensibility through new and alternative modules is
|
||||
planned. The suite was renamed "openDesk" a few weeks ago. As of 2024,
|
||||
the coordination and management of openDesk will be completely handed
|
||||
over to the Centre for Digital Sovereignty (ZenDiS GmbH). ZenDiS was
|
||||
founded at the end of 2022 to bundle the German government's digital
|
||||
sovereignty initiatives, and is fully state-owned.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>In contrast, Dataport has not yet released the source code for its
|
||||
workspace suite. The dPhoenixSuite contains numerous Free Software
|
||||
components and is advertised as "open source", "based on open source"
|
||||
and "digitally sovereign". This gives the false impression that
|
||||
dPhoenixSuite is Free Software. Dataport has not yet taken any steps to
|
||||
correct this impression or to actually make the suite available as Free
|
||||
Software.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>BMI: Dataport collaborates intensively on openDesk</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Meanwhile, [FSFE has received the BMI's response to our
|
||||
questions](LINK TO ANSWERS PDF). The answers clarify that Dataport
|
||||
plays an important role in the development of openDesk, especially in
|
||||
the architectural design and operational development of the product,
|
||||
and receives public funding from the BMI for this. For 2023 alone, the
|
||||
BMI has earmarked 21.6 million euros for openDesk. However, it remains
|
||||
unclear what proportion of this funding is passed on to Dataport. There
|
||||
is also a lack of transparency about how much of the funding will
|
||||
actually go to the companies driving the development and integration of
|
||||
the modules used in openDesk.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>According to the BMI, there are overlaps between openDesk and the
|
||||
older dPhoenixSuite, which has mainly influenced the architecture of
|
||||
openDesk. However, the Ministry emphasises the independence of its
|
||||
openDesk suite: "The Sovereign Workspace is building its own
|
||||
architecture. [...] The Sovereign Workspace is an independent project.
|
||||
[…] To what extent Dataport aligns its dPhoenixSuite with it is up to
|
||||
Dataport". The BMI does not disclose to what extent dPhoenix code has
|
||||
been incorporated into openDesk. The Ministry states that it did not
|
||||
influence Dataport to make the dPhoenixSuite available as Free
|
||||
Software.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p><a href="https://download.fsfe.org/policy/Dataport_BMI_answers.pdf">The full BMI response can be found here</a>.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Dataport must take a stand</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>So far, when asked about the dPhoenixSuite code, Dataport has referred to the source code of the
|
||||
included modules and to the BMI's openDesk project. The BMI's answers
|
||||
make it clear once again: Despite some similarities and organisational
|
||||
entanglements, dPhoenixSuite and openDesk are two different products.
|
||||
Dataport can no longer shift the responsibility for releasing its own
|
||||
source code onto the BMI, but must take a stand: if the dPhoenixSuite
|
||||
is to be a digitally sovereign workspace for public administrations,
|
||||
then Dataport should finally make the complete dPhoenix code available
|
||||
under a Free Software licence, ideally compliant with the openDesk
|
||||
reference implementation and not as a competing product.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>However, BMI's response also contains a reference to possible
|
||||
proprietary components of the dPhoenixSuite. If Dataport continues with
|
||||
its proprietary strategy, and if the suite does contain proprietary
|
||||
code, it should no longer be advertised with the misleading terms
|
||||
"digitally sovereign" and "open source". In this case, Dataport should
|
||||
also correct the previous misleading communication by stating on its
|
||||
website that the suite is not Free Software to avoid any impression of
|
||||
open-washing.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>openDesk needs transparency and efficiency</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Regarding the openDesk workspace, its funding and its links to the dPhoenixSuite, the
|
||||
BMI's answers only partially provide the necessary transparency.
|
||||
However, the publication of the openDesk code and its open development
|
||||
on openCoDE are important steps in the right direction. The
|
||||
documentation and announcements about the future of the openDesk
|
||||
project also give reason for cautious optimism that a fully-fledged
|
||||
Free Software workspace for administrations might soon be
|
||||
available.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>In the future, the BMI and ZenDiS should not only manage the
|
||||
development of openDesk transparently, but also make the governance of
|
||||
the project transparent and understandable to the public – a
|
||||
prerequisite for openDesk to gain trust and acceptance in public
|
||||
administrations.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>Transparency is also the only way to ensure that public funds for
|
||||
openDesk are used efficiently and actually contribute to the
|
||||
development of Free Software. The FSFE has recently <a href="/news/2023/news-20230829-01.html">called on the
|
||||
German government to increase funding for Free Software instead of
|
||||
cutting it</a>, as is
|
||||
currently planned in the 2024 budget. Since openDesk is a major digital
|
||||
sovereignty project of this legislative period, there should be more
|
||||
budget for it, and that money should be used for actual Free Software
|
||||
development, feature implementation, maintenance, and integration of
|
||||
the modules. The BMI must finally make the organisational development
|
||||
of ZenDiS a priority and thereby secure Free Software projects for
|
||||
public administration in the long term.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>The FSFE will continue to monitor developments around openDesk and
|
||||
the dPhoenixSuite. If you have any relevant information, you're welcome
|
||||
to <a href="/about/contact.html">share it with us</a>.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>Free Software and "Public Money? Public Code!”</h3> <p>Free
|
||||
Software gives everyone the right to use, study, share, and improve
|
||||
applications for any purpose. These freedoms ensure that similar
|
||||
applications do not have to be programmed from scratch every time and,
|
||||
thanks to transparent processes, others do not have to reinvent the
|
||||
wheel. In large projects, expertise and costs can be shared and
|
||||
applications paid for by the general public are available to all. This
|
||||
promotes innovation and saves taxpayers money in the medium to long
|
||||
term. Dependencies on vendors are minimised and security issues can be
|
||||
fixed more easily. The Free Software Foundation Europe, together with
|
||||
over 200 organisations and administrations, is therefore calling for
|
||||
“Public Money? Public Code!” - If it is public money, it should be
|
||||
public code as well. More information on the initiative is available on
|
||||
the <a href="https://publiccode.eu/">“Public Money? Public Code!” website</a>.</p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
|
||||
<tags>
|
||||
<tag key="front-page" />
|
||||
<tag key="de">Germany</tag>
|
||||
<tag key="pmpc">Public Money? Public Code!</tag>
|
||||
</tags>
|
||||
|
||||
<discussion href="https://community.fsfe.org/t/1075"/>
|
||||
<image url="https://pics.fsfe.org/uploads/medium/80/55/3fc43813d932a3a95f7a233e2f76.png"
|
||||
alt="Image showing a computer with the dphoenix suit on it" />
|
||||
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user