On 15 December 2011 15:35, Richard Symonds <richard.symonds(a)wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:
All,****
** **
Jon and the Board would like your input on our proposed open source
policy. This would cover the general IT policy of the office – broadly
defining what hardware/software we would be using as a chapter, and other
IT-related issues. The policy is at
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_source_policy: we’re really keen to
have comments on this from WMUK members and supporters.****
** **
I would have questions for anyone who is a strong advocate of open source
software
in this context:
* What about documentation? Can you put your hand on your heart and say
that if your job depended on it, you would be happy with the documentation
that comes with typical open source software?
* Given that the software may be harder to use than the commercial
equivalents, how would you justify the extra time cost to donors? Office
costs are an overhead.
* Do you know the history here of WMUK's experience?
There are obviously other points. But as far as I'm concerned, and I speak
as someone who has been in Richard's position, using open source to get
administration done is a red herring, not an important "red line". (And of
course I realise there are other views.)
Charles