Thursday, March 06, 2003

Official Python Blog?

Should we have an official Python weblog as part of

Fredrik Lundh's Daily Python-URL has been around a long time and does an excellent job of highlighting some of the things happening in the world of Python, but there are also a lot of things that don't appear. There is a Python Programmer Weblogs meta-blog that covers a lot more, but has the problem of not being 100% focused on Python issues, plus you tend to see a bit of duplication as people blogroll posts. There are some meta-blog lists on the PyZine home page just above the PyZine weblogs.

The Dr. Dobb's Python-URL provides a weekly summary of happenings on comp.lang.python. comp.lang.python.announce covers new module releases and other announcements, but there is no RSS feed, it isn't updated every day, and again there are Python articles and other happenings that simply get missed. already has a number of RDF/RSS files. There is an RSS file for the Python Package Index (PyPI). There is also an RSS feed for the Python wiki RecentChanges page. Finally, there is an channews.rdf file originally done for Netscape, which is generated from the data file, channews.dat.

So, I just want to get this idea out there and see what other people think about whether we should have one, what items would and wouldn't appear in it. We should probably skip the implementation for now. You can email me directly with comments or post a follow-up on the blog and I'll summarize for the marketing-python mailing list where I first brought up this idea.

11:53:09 AM    comment []

More on Oregon House Bill 2892

Oregon State Representative Phil Barnhart, the sponsor of House Bill 2892 (PDF), has posted a brief overview of the reasons for introducing the Open Source Software bill.

There is a Newsforge article too.

Someone posted a note about David Wheeler's exhaustive Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS)? Look at the Numbers! aritcle which is relevant to the bill.

8:57:47 AM    comment []

Oregon Legislature to Consider Open Source Bill

Below is part of the summary for House Bill 2892:

Requires state government to consider using open source
software when acquiring new software. Sets other requirements for
acquiring software.
                        A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to software acquisitions by state government.
  (1) The Legislative Assembly finds that:
  (a) The cost of obtaining software for the state's computer
systems has become a significant expense to the state;
  (b) The personnel costs of maintaining the software on the
state's computers has also become a significant expense to the
  (c) It is necessary to the functioning of the state that
computer data owned by the state be permanently available to the
state throughout its useful life;
  (d) To guarantee the succession and permanence of public data,
it is necessary that the state's accessibility to that data be
independent of the goodwill of the state's computer system
suppliers and the monopoly conditions imposed by these suppliers;
  (e) It is in the public interest to ensure interoperability of
computer systems through the use of software and products that
promote open, platform-neutral standards;
  (f) It is also in the public interest that the state be free,
to the greatest extent possible, of restrictions imposed by
parties outside the state's control on how, and for how long, the
state may use the software it has acquired; and
  (g) It is not in the public interest and it is a violation of
the fundamental right to privacy for the state to use software
that, in addition to its stated function, also transmits data to,
or allows control and modification of its systems by, parties
outside of the state's control.
  (2) The Legislative Assembly further finds that:
  (a) The acquisition and widespread deployment of open source
software can significantly reduce the state's costs of obtaining
and maintaining software;
  (b) Open source software guarantees that its encoding of data
is not tied to a single provider;
  (c) Open source software ensures interoperability through
adherence to open, platform-neutral standards;
  (d) Open source software contains no restrictions on how, or
for how long, it may be used; and
  (e) Since open source software fully discloses its internal
operations, it can be audited, at any time and by anyone of the
state's choosing, for internal functions that are contrary to the
public's interests and rights.
  (3) Therefore, it is in the public interest that the State of
Oregon consider using open source software in its public
computing functions.

7:52:57 AM    comment []