Talk:Open source policy

Had a read - seems like it is slowly taking shape, so that's good - keep going Steve Virgin 01:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Richard's view

Foreword

Paraphrasing Jon here, and acutely aware that the final decision is not in my hands, however:

Background

No comments from me here really.

Software

Jon mentions a few programs here:

1. Open Office - Generally I've found to be pretty good, and works quite well in an office environment.
2. Scribus - Not used this previously, but I'm led to believe that it's one of the best DTP programs around.
3. GIMP - Again, pretty good, and certainly adequate for what we'd be doing.
4. CiviCRM - Has its issues, but they are fixable, and the system as a whole is growing on me. Remarkably easy to customise. Certainly better than the SAP-based and bespoke systems I've used with previous employers.
5. Google Apps - Not free for UK charities, but possibly negotiable on that point as we're educational and have the Wikipedia brand behind us. Even if we have to pay full business rates, it's not too dear - £33/user/year. I am wholeheartedly behind Google Apps, and it would make my job a lot easier. However, we would need to ensure that the public wiki is kept up to date.

Hardware

I will admit that I have played with Linux and Solaris installations in the past, but I tend to stick with Windows these days. I've had problems when trying to get my peripherals, programs and documents to work with anything other than Windows. However, I don't imagine it would be very difficult for me to pick up OSX or Linux-based systems, and I am happy to learn either - with preference to the more stable of the two, as I won't have time to troubleshoot tech problems.

Regarding Lenovo/Thinkpads, they are now made in China by a Chinese firm, not by IBM. Not sure what these means for quality, but historically they're very robust. I've even seen one still working after taking a bullet - the case was shattered, but it still worked and was actually perfectly usable. Robustness is the key if we're going to use a laptop for any reason: it will inevitably be dragged off to every event and business meeting around the country, and will take a few blows along the way.

Security

Kensington locks: brilliant idea, simple and cheap. They stop walk-in thefts, which happen even in secure buildings (happened every few weeks when I worked at the NHS). USB backups are workable for most things, but I wouldn't be happy backing up anything sensitive to a USB stick. That said, I can't imagine it's too tricky to simply back everything up to an off- or on-site archive once a week.

Easy to set up. Jon Davies 20:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

In my health-project day job, where data security is top priority, we are encouraged to use USB drives with hardware encryption: more trustworthy than the cloud and it's not a disaster if they're left on a bus. Most of these seem incredibly costly, but I found an 8GB drive for a tenner. MartinPoulter 16:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I seriously suggest there be a more robust computer data backup scheme in place than "store it on the cloud and some USB sticks". Preferably stored in more than one way and regularly tested. -- KTC 00:48, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

User interface

Good screens are a must-have. I'd be a little concerned about allowing visitors access to our network, and would like to see a little more work on this from a security perspective - I would like to separate out visitors from the secure parts of our system. I know how keen the folks at WR would be to get their hands on donor data, and no doubt they will try if they think it will help them. That said, we do need to make adequate provisions for visitors in future. Richard Symonds 06:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Visitors would, just like me here at the Foundation get an ethernet cables, a laptop cradle and the leads to use a decent size monitor.. No access to our data. Jon Davies 20:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

It sounds like the office wifi is to give access to internet and shared backup, not to give privileged access to things like donor data. That said, what would be the file-sharing arrangements? MartinPoulter 16:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Good question. Key here I think is backup which with a small office is easy to forget or over manage. A cloud or at least remote system means that this could be sub contracted. Backup may be available from the IT people in the building. All of this is operational of course. Roger Bamkin 21:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Same as now I suspect. Jon Davies WMUK 17:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Google Apps

This issue really needs to be split up into multiple components. I've tried to do that in what follows; this needs further analysis, expansion and reformatting before it can be included in the policy/description section though.

• Text documents via Google Docs - we should only be using these in preference to wikis where we have issues with the security of the information in ways that the WMUK wikis can't cope with. We need to deal with issues regarding formatting (e.g. by training Jon to use wiki formatting techniques, and in the wider setting investing in improving MediaWiki's visual editor). A compromise scenario here is using EtherPad, which is open source software but is more equivalent to editing a document in Notepad/TextEdit than it is to using software such as Microsoft Word. Another compromise is using ODS via LibreOffice - but this is not set up to work in a collaborative fashion, which goes against our general organisational approach.

I think there is a difference between composing text, and composing a document. Wiki markup and the kind of formatting that you get from Word, GDocs, or .ods do not interoperate (at least not without just copy-pasting unformatted text and formatting from scratch). So I would prefer us to use all of Wikitext, Google docs and .ods files depending on the circumstances...The Land 20:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• Spreadsheets via Google Docs. This is clearly without competition in terms of collaborative spreadsheets, so (sadly) I can't oppose us using these. LibreOffice is clearly not competitive in this scenario, since we're natively dealing with collaborative documents.
• Presentations. These can easily be assembled using LibreOffice. Microsoft Powerpoint and Apple Keynote are the closed-source competitors here, but LibreOffice is easily the equal of Powerpoint (although in terms of visual effects, it does lag behind Keynote). Google Docs' version of this isn't really relevant since presentations are intrinsically non-collaborative, personal presentations.
• Forms. This is a topic that needs to be investigated in more detail. However, Google's forms are rather basic and lack visual appeal. Other closed-source software may be better used here (e.g. SurveyMonkey).
• Calendar. It is surprisingly tricky to find collaborative open source software for this task. However, that software does exist - e.g. [1]. This is currently set up at http://calendar.wikimedia.org.uk for testing, and needs further evaluation to determine whether it can be effectively used here. Bonuses include the multiple access levels that can be set up within the calendar software, and that it can automatically import from Google Calendar and export to ICS calendars (which can be used e.g. for importing to Apple iCal). The downsides are that the software lacks easy integration with other applications (including gmail, Outlook, Apple Mail, and other closed-source tools). This needs to be investigated in more detail.
• Email. Gmail sadly seems to be coming the status quo in terms of webmail, but is closed source, and has unresolved issues about long-term viability, security and reliability. Alternative webmail based on open source software (including the currently-used Horde, but also many alternatives) is a possibility - usability issues are present though (but could be resolved?). The industry-standard solution here is to use the open source POP/SMTP or IMAP solutions, which the (linux-based) WMUK server supports. This enables offline email clients to be used - including closed-source applications such as Microsoft Outlook or Apple Mail, but also open-source applications such as Mozilla Thunderbird. The optimal solution here is probably to use a combination of webmail for ad-hoc email access when away from a WMUK computer, and Thunderbird when a WMUK computer is accessible.

Mike Peel 23:15, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy with the policy (at the top) but need software that will work for staff efficiency. The international discussion over Christmas came back time and again to staff resources being the most important aspect of what we do. Bottom line is that we move towards everything being open source, and I will do my bit, (Can anyone tell me how to permanently change the font in Openoffice templates????) but there are some things we need to get around. I am using Horde for emails but it is not offering me the flexibility or user-interface I expect and get from my personal gmail account my personal btaccount or others I have used. I also need to be able to create documents with spreadhseets and charts in them for sharing and the wiki pages are not yet there. Finally I would like to be able to share calendars with staff and trustees. All of this points, as others have concluded, that for the moment we use Google apps but keep an eye on the alternatives. The other area is the accountancy package which is getting urgent and is not as easy to sort out as I had hoped. In terms of security - thanks for the comments . Taken on board and Richard and I will come up with belt, braces and more belts solutions.

Jon Davies WMUK 12:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

My recommendation on email is to have the best of both worlds. You can use GMail to read your webmail/hoard iMap folders (ask Richard). This means that your email is on the hoard system in case something weird (and unlikely) happens to Google mail data, such as being accidentally deleted and you can go between either system and read the same emails at any point. You then get all the lovely goodness of Google application integration, mobile apps, threading, topic sorting etc. Unfortunately calendaring has not been so easy to run parallel systems, but not impossible - a discussion to have elsewhere. --Fæ 12:45, 30 December 2011 (UTC)