A report on action items from previous meeting prepared by Ross Gardler had been circulated by email and was tabled at the meeting.
[ACTION 1] SLe to bring OSSW in contact with LTG for OER Complete: some collaborative work undertaken, in particular with Rowan Wilson sharing his expertise on copyright. However this did not result in any direct collaboration on the creation of educational materials with LTG.
[ACTION 2] RG to create SLAs for project services (Red/Amber/Green) Complete: SLAs in OSS Watch version control and now implemented by OpenDirective. Not rolled out formally within OSS Watch due to cultural resistance within the team. However, the activities are captured in the support plan and documented in two informal documents supplied to projects seeking support ([How to engage OSS Watch in support of your project bid], [Advice for project bids] and [Planning for Sustainability])
[ACTION 3] RG to identify charge structures for project services Complete: implemented in OpenDirective
[ACTION 4] RG to explore potential OER for collaboration with CETIS and UKOLN A collaborative bid was made with CETIS (unsuccessful). No further opportunities identified.
[ACTION 5] RG to follow up opportunities with DR re sustainability at Web Science conference No activity undertaken.
[ACTION 6] RG to consider having OSSW follow up with JG on government rethinking skills needed for the digital economy Meetings held with the Cabinet office in relation to their open source policy, including addressing skills gap. Discussions ongoing.
[ACTION 7] RG to research opportunities business model for via a blog [ACTION8] JG to help get input for opportunities business model OSS Watch Neither activity followed through. Instead followed the one on one consultation model to inform creation of OpenDirective.
SW commented on [ACTION 4]: a forthcoming JISC call may provide an opportunity to re-purpose the unsuccessful joint bid with CETIS
SW: Bolton also involved in Apache Rave, he has come across a few other similar EU projects, there seem to be disconnection between different projects working on this topic, there is scope for coordinated action
SL: What will happen with OSS Watch's involvement in advisory committees? SvdW: this is likely to move along with Ross
PW: what has the latest survey found about open source procurement? SvdW: willingness to adopt open source reflected at policy level, but still barriers to implementing it in practice. SW: perhaps one needs evaluating how os software perform certain specific tasks, rather than just the extent to which open source is being adopted.
SL: currently not many JISC calls where OSS Watch can apply, perhaps need to look at making ourselves known more to Research Councils.
PW: when organizing devCSI events he found it difficult engaging with the Software Sustainability Institute, perhaps better not to mention SSI if we approach Research Councils.
ACTION – SvdW to contact Research Councils and pitch OSS Watch services to them
JG: will the previous leaning towards Apache continue after Ross's departure? SvdW: we don't prioritise Apache, we work with other foundations as well (e.g. Outercourve). AS: if OSS Watch favoured Apache, this was due to the emphasis Apache places on community development. PW: The ASF's influence in our sector via OSS Watch was beneficial, however it would be good if OSS Watch tried to engage with other foundations e.g. Sakai, Jasig, Kuali (PW is himself in communication with Kuali). SLe: OUCS works with Sakai on Oxford's VLE, Brad Wheeler will be visiting OUCS in September, perhaps good opportunity to look at closer collaboration with Sakai. SW: happy to explore ways to collaborate with other foundations. JG: Eclipse is another one you should consider, Red Monk works with them, happy to make introductions. SL: it makes sense for OSS Watch to engage with foundations that have technical expertise in the same areas as the projects you advise. JG: also consider liaising with Skills Matter, they provide extensive open source training, people often ask them about os licensing, JG happy to provide introductions.
ACTION: SvdW to explore ways to collaborate with other software foundations (e.g. Sakai, Eclipse)
ACTION: SvdW to consider collaborating with Skills Matter on os training
SLe: OUCS received JISC letter of intent to fund OSS Watch, JISC themselves are waiting on HEFCE, services like OSS Watch should be on a 3-year funding cycle. PW: unlikely to have a better funding cycle in place for the next 2 yrs
SvdW: next funding period less focus on content, work with JISC Infonet to repackage existing content. PW: talked with Infonet's Steve Bailey about re-purposing content, potential problem with different cc license attribution (commercial vs non-commercial), have you discussed this with them? SvdW: not yet, good to know; Rowan will be able to advise here. SLe (to PW): why would you chose cc commercial? PW: couldn't find any reasons not to. SLe: in several OUCS projects we found that people feel more inclined to contribute content if cc non-commercial is in place. PW: OSS Watch should have a point of view on this. SvdW: We're looking into this
ACTION: SvdW to liaise with JISC Infonet to discuss licence for re-purposing content, get Rowan's advice for potential problem with different cc license attributions
SLe: OD is not part of the university, spinning out seems a viable alternative both OUCS and JISC are looking at; Sander's recent presentation to JISC was well received and offered ideas re what can be done
SvdW: over the past few years OSS Watch gradually moved towards self-sustainability, OD was created to better engage with the commercial sector, they work with clients interested in the academic sector (e.g. libraries), we are defining a working relationship with OD (e.g. OSS Watch is part of DataFlow project and OD is contracted to deal with sustainability aspects); OD is also expected to contract work back to OSS Watch; we collaborate on training sessions at TransferSummit.
SLe: OD can apply to funding that is not available to OSS Watch.
JG: so far OSS Watch was not competing with Red Monk, now since the OD spinout may be, we may need to rethink our involvement, would have been nice if we were notified in advance. SL: the fact that Red Monk is on OSS Watch advisory committee, and OD is not, is a good sign.
SW: is OSS Watch ditching green level support in favour of OD? SvdW: no, it's just different types of green support; OSS Watch has now a smaller team, OD will focus on green projects with commercial opportunity. SW: so green level support remains key for OSS Watch? SvdW: yes.
SW: if a company offered to contract you for a certain work package, would you be able to accept it? SLe: OSS Watch will be able to work with any company if appropriate, not just OD; we already do this in OUCS. SvdW: we would like to work with all appropriate companies, including Red Monk.
SvdW: there will be training opportunities at TransferSummit. PW: we are also looking at training, possibly via devCSI; happy to work with OSS Watch on this as well. JG: consider Skills Matter, they are very commercial, have trained thousands of people in the past few years.
SvdW: longer term we are looking at helping government with procurement, reuse some of our current resources for the government and public sector; we are also aware of NL government initiatives, who are seen as good drive at EU level.
SvdW: any ideas for a Competency Centre lead by OSS Watch? SL: content management software? Cloud-based shared services relevant to universities?
SLe: any alternative funding models CETIS and UKOLN are looking into? SW: we are currently looking at events. PW: previously had some core funding from MLA (now disbanded); currently discussing with local government, “big society” concept might generate some money at this level. SW: what kind of local services? PW: e.g. open data gov, ILRT Bristol have done some work on this.
PW: we are looking at standards training, it would make sense to partner with OSS Watch on events. PW: we have to keep devCSI events free of charge as developers tend to get less support from their institutions than academics. SL: on-site training is less costly, universities have good facilities for hosting events. PW: we try to think events regionally, aimed at developers in a certain area. JG: perhaps Lanyrd would be a suitable partner, lots of discussion on Lanyrd about where to host events, who to partner with; regional events may be good for OSS Watch, academia tends to be more distributed than businesses.
SW: an alternative funding stream could be preparing bids for calls, EU framework projects need bid writing, OSS Watch could scale up what they already do helping academic projects to write bids. PW: good idea, you should consider developing a small service that would be paid for writing or managing EU framework projects. SvdW: we plan to become more visible at EU level, have been approached by OSOR who seem visible in this space; are you aware of them? SW: no, never heard of them.
It is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 England & Wales licence.
OSS Watch is funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee.