Defense Department sets up its own SourceForge
The dam holding back U.S. federal adoption of open source just burst with the introduction of the Defense Department's Forge.mil.
Forge.mil is an open-source project repository built in the image of SourceForge.net, Federal Computer Week reported Friday.
Despite being based on SourceForge's technology, Forge.mil has one significant difference: security. As David Mihelcic, chief technology officer for the Defense Information Systems Agency, told Federal Computer Week, the Department of Defense's code repository has been "upgraded to meet DOD security requirements," with smart cards used to provide log-in credentials.
There are only three open-source projects hosted at Forge.mil so far, and it's initially restricted to the Defense Department's technology community, but I suspect this number will soon increase as various federal agencies discover it and ask to collaborate on code through it. It's also a new way for vendors to participate in Defense Department projects, as Mihelcic noted about one project, which is designed to automate server configuration:
"Our intern had to stand up 50 Linux machines in a lab and he said, 'Boy I don't want to do this by hand; why can't I use Bastille to do this for me?'" Mihelcic said. "He looked at Bastille and saw it couldn't do all the things he needed, so he started an open-source project. He got folks like Red Hat to jump in and participate."
All of the code is open for public view, though only those with the right Defense Department credentials can edit or contribute to the projects. As the public sees the code, however, it's almost certain to lead to individuals wanting to contribute to the code.
The Defense Department, which has been pushing hard to get involved in open source for some time as a consumer, is now involved as a developer. In just a few years, open source has gone from being "risky" to one of the best ways to mitigate risk.
Editor's note: The code is actually based on CollabNet's SourceForge Enterprise code, not the SourceForge.net code base. CollabNet enables Forge.mil.
Follow me on Twitter at mjasay.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay. 
Re: "IBM, Bankers at Odds Over OS/2 Migration Path
Vendor advises OS/2 users to switch to Linux, but ATM makers are leading push to Windows"
http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/story/0,10801,83884,00.html
Banks adopting Windows is the reason why ATM's are routinely hacked these days...
Not exactly open source, but for this particular purpose, it's a better model to work with.
Back here on earth it is long dead.
http://en.ecomstation.ru/solutions/?action=solutions
Have ya ever heard of a company called Serenity Systems International dude!!!
See about "eComStation 2.0 RC6a (being) released"
http://www.ecomstation.com/
Right?
Remember, if you cannot get into space then "All Your (Celestial) Base Are Belong To US"!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9oh3gqOEKU
"To Boldly Go Where None Has Gone Before"!
Live Long And Prosper!
Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see OSS as a baseline requirement for DoD-sourced contracts. And, I believe for the sake of transparency we, as tax-payers, deserve this.
Just like the DoD to be behind the curve. We don't need Forge.mil with CAC-access. We need Github.mil with CAC-access. But, oh well.
Your example with contractor A is flawed. Because of the work involved in building from the ground up, most contractors already use code that's already been created. Some are too arrogant and will only use their own code, thinking it's better. Others will only use Open Source, believing everyone else is better. Then there are those who use a hybrid of the two, giving back contributions, but saving the parts which make the code secure, leaving those security holes for others to fill in how they'd like.
In other words, contractors are already using open source and already making some parts of their work open to the public as a way of repaying the community. Open Source has been in government for as long as licensing permitted, it's just not been acknowledged. Now they're starting to learn how to embrace it.
If you want to take over a column, make your own. Grownups with a clue are talking.
"Where Eagles Dare"!
And, we talk about "grownups"!
"Eight Years"!
I can tell you that there is very, very little community participation in the form of "giving back". Most government contractors are pushed away for GPL licensed software because their legal functions fear the loss of IP. So, basically this Forge.mil instance is just another firewall preventing the use of GPL because it blocks the ability for any changes to go back to the source.
New software that is being developed by contractors...well I think you're going to have to explain to me why any contractor would want to collaborate. Speaking from experience collaborating across contracts within the same contractor is painful...and in many cases not even possible due to "color of money" issues. I suppose we should be happy that facilities are being provided to promote the potential collaboration in the form of DoD-open code. But, back to my original point. Unless government agencies reform the acquisition process to provide some incentive to use it - contractors won't pay attention.
There is another angle. As Jim Stogdill bluntly points out here: http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/01/the-army-the-web-and-the-case.html - there is an opportunity. This requires that intra-agency projects be hosted in a Forge.mill environment. It is possible to imagine contractors being able to provide community-based development opportunities extra life. By exposing real-life "problems" through the Forge.mil environment it is possible to imagine DoS-sourced software projects growing. But, even the generative nature is cramped, because it is limited to those with CAC cards.
Anyway...just take away Matt's key point here that there is a huge difference between consuming OSS and producing it.
My main criticism with your response is in how you view collaboration between contractors.
When using an Open Source model, you're not limited to using only new code, written that day. You're meant to take what exists already and build off of that. You're not collaborating in real time so much as collaborating with those who have already tested and retested what you're now working on. Because of all this testing and tweaking and retesting of the code, it becomes more and more stable. You end up having a very strong base to work off of.
Contractors would end up being able to make better product with less work and no collaboration issues, just an understanding that you get paid, but you don't get ownership. Of course, dealing with the government, this is often the case anyway. At least this way you'd know it's going to help your fellow contractors.
Yep, "Mission Accomplished" - Again!
Come work for us for free!!!
dang - tried to verify the cert anyway and it failed!
You do not have permission to view this page.
If you feel you have received this message in error, please contact the SourceForge administrator.
- by john.mark February 2, 2009 10:08 AM PST
- Hi Matt - Just a friendly note to let you know that this is a CollabNet operation. Forge.mil runs on CollabNet SourceForge Enterprise :)
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(37 Comments)-John Mark
openCollabNet Community Manager
http://www.collab.net/