I was a little skeptic of this at first because I thought it might be a way to grab free development out of the community but then I read this but in their license:
Open source and free software (which refers to software freedom, not free of cost) are industry best practices and integral parts of modern software development. They, however, are concepts yet to be widely adopted within the department. With Code.mil, DoD can access a depth and breadth of technical skill previously underutilized while offering software tools created by the government for free public use.
Specifically, many of my colleagues believe that publicly funded research should be publicly available. Perhaps this is the same interpretation for code. I’m excited to see what projects end up in this domain.
My DoD skepticism level: unless there are specific contractors, technology offices, or project offices who care about this, i.e. think it will give them a competitive advantage or make good things happen for them faster, nothing will come of this. A cultural change like this would require a lot of clout and/or an impressive record of success behind it; no visible projects already underway is not a good sign for building a record of success.
The most overfunded and most euphemistically named institution on the planet needs help from the OSS community. Makes me wanna hurl.
But thanks for sharing - it is interesting to know that this exists. I hope it’s gonna be an epic fail.
It doesn’t help anything to be so negative, and it can even discourage people from sticking their neck out for bigger changes if even little things like this get shit on and ripped apart. I’m not a fan of the DoD (or the government in general), but I’d rather they do this than keep all of their code private. We’re paying for it, we should have access to it. It’s a small step, but it’s better than nothing.
Also, I think you missed the point. I don’t think they’re really “asking for help”; they’re just making the code available on GitHub. People can submit issues and pull requests if they want, but they can also just grab it and go use it for their own purposes.
It doesn’t help anything to be so negative
I am not negative. I am voicing my honest feelings about this. I am absolutely terrified about what is going on in the U.S. at the moment. No objectiveness or positivity intended - raw feels. I am not a citizen of the U.S. I am watching from the outside and … I have to repeat: I am terrified.
Just to summarize: the biggest army in the world by far is about to up their budget by 53 billion. Do you have any idea how mind boggling this is? WWIII anyone? So please forgive me if I have trouble to rustle up positivity when I read anything about the US military complex.
Also, I think you missed the point. I don’t think they’re really “asking for help”; they’re just making the code available on GitHub.
No. I think you’re missing the point.
Call to action
Call to action
Who will pay me if I participate in this process? Right. Nobody.
I am awfully, awfully sorry. But I feel very strongly at the moment, that the US military complex is sucking up too much energy already. I think it would be good for all of us if they would get less attention, less money, less anything.
I never get why they create/announce these things without at least one project for the public to get an idea of what will typically be there. I’d like to know if this will be web stuff, out of date cobol code from the 80s, embedded code or something like maths/geometry/mapping software and libraries.
The military is the ultimate large bureaucracy… extrapolating from smaller ones, I can imagine that it’s hard to coordinate two separate efforts like that.
Considering that the NSA falls under the DoD, why couldn’t they at least point to some of the projects NSA (1, 2) has posted on Github?
Agreed. It’s pretty damn anticlimactic to announce that you’re going to “do open source” and start with a call for help to nail down license details.
The best case for them is that they’re already asking some internal and external lawyers, contractors, project leaders, and project owners to weigh in on the license, but want the process to be visible; worst case is they don’t have the bandwidth to identify people to ask and ask them and are “We’re on GitHub!”-ing through it.