• After Years of Abusive E-mails, the Creator of Linux Steps Aside | The New Yorker
    https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/after-years-of-abusive-e-mails-the-creator-of-linux-steps-aside?mbid=nl_D

    Torvalds’s decision to step aside came after The New Yorker asked him a series of questions about his conduct for a story on complaints about his abusive behavior discouraging women from working as Linux-kernel programmers. In a response to The New Yorker, Torvalds said, “I am very proud of the Linux code that I invented and the impact it has had on the world. I am not, however, always proud of my inability to communicate well with others—this is a lifelong struggle for me. To anyone whose feelings I have hurt, I am deeply sorry.”

    Although it distributes its product for free, the Linux project has grown to resemble a blue-chip tech company. Nominally a volunteer enterprise, like Wikipedia, Linux, in fact, is primarily sustained by funds and programmers from the world’s large technology companies. Intel, Google, IBM, Samsung, and other companies assign programmers to help improve the code. Of the eighty thousand fixes and improvements to Linux made in the past year, more than ninety per cent were produced by paid programmers, the foundation reported in 2017; Intel employees alone were responsible for thirteen per cent of them. These same companies, and hundreds of others, covered the foundation’s roughly fifty-million-dollar annual budget.

    Linux’s élite developers, who are overwhelmingly male, tend to share their leader’s aggressive self-confidence. There are very few women among the most prolific contributors, though the foundation and researchers estimate that roughly ten per cent of all Linux coders are women. “Everyone in tech knows about it, but Linus gets a pass,” Megan Squire, a computer-science professor at Elon University, told me, referring to Torvalds’s abusive behavior. “He’s built up this cult of personality, this cult of importance.”

    Valerie Aurora, a former Linux-kernel contributor, told me that a decade of working in the Linux community convinced her that she could not rise in its hierarchy as a woman. Aurora said that the concept of Torvalds and other powerful tech figures being “equal-opportunity assholes” was false and sexist: when she and Sharp adopted Torvalds’ aggressive communication style, they experienced retaliation. “Basically, Linus has created a model of leadership—which is being an asshole,” Aurora told me. “Sage and I can tell you that being an asshole was not available to us. If we were an asshole, we got smacked for it, got punished, got held back. I tried it.”

    Torvalds, by contrast, long resisted the idea that the Linux programming team needed to become more diverse, just as he resisted calls to tone down his language. In 2015, Sharp advocated for a first-ever code of conduct for Linux developers. At a minimum, they hoped for a code that would ban doxxing—the releasing of personal information online to foment harassment—and threats of violence in the community. Instead, Torvalds accepted a programming fix provocatively titled “Code of Conflict,” which created a mechanism for filing complaints more generally. In the three years since then, no developers have been disciplined for abusive comments. Sharp, who was employed by Intel at the time, said they carefully avoided Linux kernel work thereafter.

    #Linux #Linus_Torvalds #Genre #Développeurs #Logiciels_libres #Machisme

  • The percentage of open source code in proprietary apps is rising - Help Net Security
    https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2018/05/22/open-source-code-security-risk

    Compiled after examining the findings from the anonymized data of over 1,100 commercial codebases audited in 2017 by the Black Duck On-Demand audit services group, the report revealed that:

    96 percent of the scanned applications contain open source components, with an average 257 components per application, and that
    The average percentage of open source in the codebases of the applications scanned grew from 36% last year to 57%, suggesting that a large number of applications now contain much more open source than proprietary code.

    “Today, open source use is pervasive across every industry and is used by organizations of all sizes. The reasons are straightforward—open source lowers development costs, speeds time to market, and accelerates innovation and developer productivity,” analysts with the Synopsys Center for Open Source Research & Innovation (COSRI) have noted.

    #Logiciels_libres #Open_source #Cybersécurité

  • Modalités d’ouverture des codes sources | Modalités d’ouverture des codes sources
    https://disic.github.io/politique-de-contribution-open-source

    Comment ouvrir ses codes sources ? Quelle licence choisir ? Comment un agent public peut-il contribuer à un logiciel libre existant ?

    Conformément à la Loi pour une République Numérique du 7 octobre 2016, les codes sources sont des documents administratifs communicables et réutilisables.

    La DINSIC a souhaité échanger avec les acteurs de l’État, mais également les communautés du libre, les associations, les sociétés privées et le secteur académique sur les modalités d’ouverture des codes sources.

    Cette politique a été validée par l’ensemble des DSI ministériels le 15 février 2018 et est officiellement en vigueur.
    Contenu du document

    Politique de contribution aux logiciels libres de l’État
    Principes d’ouverture des codes sources
    Bonnes pratiques
    Instanciation des politiques de contribution ministérielles
    Gouvernance de la politique de contribution interministérielle
    Foire aux questions

    Licence

    Ce document est publié sous la Licence Ouverte 2.0.

    #Logiciels_libres

  • Open source isn’t the community you think it is | ITworld
    https://www.itworld.com/article/3268001/open-source-tools/open-source-isnt-the-community-you-think-it-is.html

    Name your favorite open source project, and the odds are good—very good—that a small handful of contributors account for the vast majority of significant development thereof. The odds are just as good that most of those contributors work for just one or a few vendors. Such is open source today, and such has been open source for the past 20 years.

    So, does that mean open source is really just commercial software by another name?
    [ Community: Who really contributes to open source. | Celebration: 20 years of open source: Its world-changing history. | Contrarian: 20 years on, open source hasn’t changed the world as promised. ]

    No, it does not. But it means the popular stereotype of a broad community coming together to create software is a myth. The reality of open source is different than the myth, but still a good, positive alternative to commercial software.
    Why only a few vendor-paid developers do almost all the work

    Thirteen years ago, I dug into academic research that showed how Mozilla’s Firefox browser and the Apache HTTP Server were both developed by a small cadre of core contributors. While the population of contributors broadened with things like bug fixes, the central development work for these and virtually all other projects was done by a talented group of core committers.

    Today, an analysis from Redmonk’s Fintan Ryan on projects housed under the Cloud Native Computing Foundation shows nothing has changed. Kubernetes is the most famous CNCF tenant, with Google and Red Hat contributing the lion’s share of code, but the other, lesser-known CNCF projects follow this same pattern. Indeed, perhaps the only real surprise in this fact of concentrated contributions is that the pattern has remained constant for so long.

    Look at any CNCF project, Ryan has shown, and you’ll see that virtually all of its contributions come from fewer than ten people. In fact, if you drill down deeper, you see that most work is done by just two people on any given project.

    As Ryan has written:

    It is fair to say that for almost all of the projects in the CNCF, specific vendors account for most of the development work being done.

    This is not to say that this is a bad thing—it is not; it is just a statement of reality. While the broad community around the projects may be large, the number of significant core contributors is relatively small, and the number of truly independent contributors is smaller still. This pattern is common across many open source projects.

    Not just “many” open source projects—all of them. I can’t think of a significant counterexample. For big, diverse projects like Linux, if you peel away the overall wrapping and count contributors for the subprojects, you see the same phenomenon: A few developers, nearly all of them employed by vendors, generate a huge percentage of core contributions.

    But if you step back, you realize it could only be thus. After all, anysoftware project degrades in efficiency the more bodies you throw at it (as Fred Brooks’s seminal book The Mythical Man Month anticipated).

    As for why most of these developers would be funded by vendors, that’s easy to explain, too: Developers have rent to pay, too, and they can only afford to heavily contribute if they are paid to do so. Companies, pursuing their corporate self-interest, employ developers to work on projects that help their business.

    Smart vendors understand how to use this to their advantage. Red Hat, for example, devoted part of its most recent earnings call to tout its Kubernetes contributions (second only to Google). As CEO Jim Whitehurst argued, those contributions let Red Hat both influence Kubernetes’s roadmap as well as better support its customers. Contributions, in short, give it a competitive advantage in selling Kubernetes.
    What “community” really means for open source

    So, is “community,” that mythical beast that powers all open source, just a chimera?

    The easy answer is “no.” That’s also the hard answer. Open source has always functioned this way.

    The interesting thing is just how strongly the central “rules” of open source engagement have persisted, even as open source has become standard operating procedure for a huge swath of software development, whether done by vendors or enterprises building software to suit their internal needs.

    While it may seem that such an open source contribution model that depends on just a few core contributors for so much of the code wouldn’t be sustainable, the opposite is true. Each vendor can take particular interest in just a few projects, committing code to those, while “free riding” on other projects for which it derives less strategic value. In this way, open source persists, even if it’s not nearly as “open” as proponents sometimes suggest.

    Is open source then any different from a proprietary product? After all, both can be categorized by contributions by very few, or even just one, vendor.

    Yes, open source is different. Indeed, the difference is profound. In a proprietary product, all the engagement is dictated by one vendor. In an open source project, especially as licensed under a permissive license like Apache 2.0, there’s always the option for a new developer or vendor to barge in and upset that balance. Kubernetes is a great example: Google started as the sole contributor but Red Hat (and others) quickly followed.

    No, this doesn’t help the casual corporate contributor that wants influence without making a sacrifice of code, but it does indicate that it’s possible to have an impact on an open source project in ways that proprietary products don’t afford.

    In short, there’s little to fear and much to celebrate in how open source works. Indeed, it is precisely this self-interested seeking of individual corporate (or personal) benefit that should keep open source flowering for decades to come.

    As should be evident 20 years into open source’s rise, the model works at both the community level and at the vendor level. Will it work for another 20? Yes.

    This story, “Open source isn’t the community you think it is” was originally published by InfoWorld.

    #Logiciels_libres #Communs #Communautés

    • @rastapopoulos Je viens de lire tes remarques sur l’excellent livre Roads and Bridges (j’avais envie de le traduire, mais je vois que Framablog l’a déjà fait... c’est bien l’open traduction ;-)

      Si on compare ce que tu dis que logiciel libre et des contraintes de financement, avec ce qui se passe également dans le monde associatif, où la course aux projets et subventions permettant de payer les permanents est devenue une nécessité, on voit bien qu’il y a un élément commun à creuser sur l’activité autonome des multitudes. Pour construire du ou des communs, il faut trouver des partenariats (communs-public ou communs-privé)... sinon, le projet risque d’être très beau, mais la réalisation pêcher par manque de solidité, de rayonnement,... (mon coeur saigne quand j’y pense ;-)

      Cela souligne d’autant plus la nécessité d’une élaboration théorique forte pour trouver des voies à l’émancipation, quel que soit le domaine. Les vieilles recettes (comme les vielles fractures des mondes militants) doivent être interrogées... et depuis trente ans, c’est cela que provoque le numérique.

  • La Cour des comptes valide le recours aux logiciels libres au sein de l’État | April
    https://www.april.org/la-cour-des-comptes-valide-le-recours-aux-logiciels-libres-au-sein-de-l-etat

    La Cour des comptes contrôle et analyse les actions de la DINSIC, dont elle salue le travail qu’elle appelle à amplifier et à relayer dans les autres services interministériels. On peut ainsi rappeler le récent appel à commentaires de la DINSIC sur la politique de contribution aux #logiciels_libres de l’#État clos le 28 janvier 2018.

  • Announcing the Initial Release of Mozilla’s Open Source Speech Recognition Model and Voice Dataset - The Mozilla Blog
    https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/11/29/announcing-the-initial-release-of-mozillas-open-source-speech-recognit

    And yet, while this technology is still maturing, we’re seeing significant barriers to innovation that can put people first. These challenges inspired us to launch Project DeepSpeech and Project Common Voice. Today, we have reached two important milestones in these projects for the speech recognition work of our Machine Learning Group at Mozilla.

    I’m excited to announce the initial release of Mozilla’s open source speech recognition model that has an accuracy approaching what humans can perceive when listening to the same recordings. We are also releasing the world’s second largest publicly available voice dataset, which was contributed to by nearly 20,000 people globally.

    #reconnaissance_vocale #logiciels_libres #Mozilla

  • The Pentagon is set to make a big push toward open source software next year - The Verge
    https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/14/16649042/pentagon-department-of-defense-open-source-software

    Besides cost, there are two other compelling explanations for why the military might want to go open source. One is that technology outside the Pentagon simply advances faster than technology within it, and by availing itself to open-source tools, the Pentagon can adopt those advances almost as soon as the new code hits the web, without going through the extra steps of a procurement process.

    Open-source software is also more secure than closed-source software, by its very nature: the code is perpetually scrutinized by countless users across the planet, and any weaknesses are shared immediately.

    “How would the Trojans have reacted if the Horse statue the Greeks gave them was made of glass and they could see right through it? They would have seen the malicious implants and removed them before letting the statue into their enterprise,” says Bob Gourley, co-founder of the security consultancy firm Cognitio and former chief technology officer of the Defense Intelligence Agency. “That is my key thought about open-source software. Everyone can examine the code and look for and remove vulnerabilities before they are brought into the enterprise.”

    #Logiciels_libres #Ministère_Défense #USA

  • Open Letter - Public Money, Public Code
    https://publiccode.eu/openletter

    Un pétition intéressante pour tous les libristes... et une revendication simple et évidente.

    Publicly funded software has to be Free and Open Source Software. While there are plenty of good reasons for this, many politicians don’t know about them yet.

    Free Software gives everybody the right to use, study, share and improve software. This right helps support other fundamental freedoms like freedom of speech, press and privacy.

    This is where you can help! Sign the open letter to give our message more weight. 5825 people and 36 organisations have already signed. We will hand over the letter and signatures to your representatives and make sure that they understand that: Public Money? Public Code!

    Public Money? Public Code!

    Digital services offered and used by our public administrations are the critical infrastructure of 21st century democratic nations. In order to establish trustworthy systems, public bodies must ensure they have full control over the software and the computer systems at the core of our state digital infrastructure. However, right now, this is rarely the case due to restrictive software licences that:

    Forbid sharing and exchanging publicly funded code. This prevents cooperation between public administrations and hinders further development.
    Support monopolies by hindering competition. As a result, many administrations become dependent on a handful of companies.
    Pose a threat to the security of our digital infrastructure by forbidding access to the source code. This makes fixing backdoors and security holes extremely difficult, if not completely impossible.

    We need software that fosters the sharing of good ideas and solutions. Like this we will be able to improve IT services for people all over Europe. We need software that guarantees freedom of choice, access, and competition. We need software that helps public administrations regain full control of their critical digital infrastructure, allowing them to become and remain independent from a handful of companies. That is why we call our representatives to support Free and Open Source Software in public administrations, because:

    Free and Open Source Software is a modern public good that allows everybody to freely use, study, share and improve applications we use on a daily basis.
    Free and Open Source Software licences provide safeguards against being locked in to services from specific companies that use restrictive licences to hinder competition.
    Free and Open Source Software ensures that the source code is accessible so that backdoors and security holes can be fixed without depending on one service provider.

    Public bodies are financed through taxes. They must make sure they spend funds in the most efficient way possible. If it is public money, it should be public code as well!

    That is why we, the undersigned, call our representatives to:

    “Implement legislation requiring that publicly financed software developed for public sector must be made publicly available under a Free and Open Source Software licence.”

    #Logiciels_libres #Législation #Services_publics

  • Quels sont les logiciels libres que l’État conseille en 2017 ? - Tech - Numerama
    http://www.numerama.com/tech/244219-quels-sont-les-logiciels-libres-que-letat-conseille-en-2017.html
    http://www.numerama.com/content/uploads/2017/03/SILL-2017-socle-interminist%C3%A9riel-logiciels-libres_0.pdf

    Le socle interministériel de logiciels libres a été mis à jour. Cette liste, publiée depuis 2012, regroupe les logiciels libres que l’État recommande. Elle inclut des programmes généralistes mais aussi des solutions bien plus pointues.

    #logiciels_libres
    #xyzaeiou

  • L’April a 20 ans, et toutes ses dents pour défendre le logiciel libre - ZDNet
    http://www.zdnet.fr/blogs/l-esprit-libre/l-april-a-20-ans-et-toutes-ses-dents-pour-defendre-le-logiciel-libre-39848430.

    Qu’est-ce qui a changé pour l’April en 20 ans ?

    Il y a eu un virage : avant 2000, notre but était de démocratiser et faire connaître l’informatique libre. Au début des années 2000, nous avons découvert des adversaires, et des menaces comme les brevets logiciels. Ça nous a obligé à augmenter nos activités en défense et pas seulement en promotion du Libre.

    Autre changement, radical : quand nous avons commencé, il n’y avait pas de Google ni de Facebook, et très peu de téléphones mobiles. Et la question de la surveillance par des entreprises privées et par les Etats n’était pas aussi sensible qu’elle l’est devenue.

    Quels sont les prochains chantiers pour l’association, pour les 2-3 ans à venir (on laissera les 20 ans à la science-fiction) ?

    Il y a évidemment l’agenda politique entre autres, nous allons bien sûr interpeller les candidats. Il faut saisir toutes les occasions possibles de distiller du logiciel libre. C’est ce que nous venons de faire en demandant que les outils de consultation publique en ligne soient basés sur des logiciels libres.

    Dans l’esprit de la campagne Dégooglisons Internet, nous avons rejoint le projet CHATONS (Collectif des Hébergeurs Alternatifs, Transparents, Ouverts, Neutres et Solidaires) initié par Framasoft, et nous allons mettre en place un Chaton April, proposant différents services en ligne, libres et loyaux.

    On va aussi continuer de sensibiliser le public avec de nouveaux outils de sensibilisation, un possible projet d’émission de radio récurrente avec Libre à Toi, en allant à la rencontre de publics très différents et pas forcément convaincus.

    Et puis encore, il y a la directive européenne sur le droit d’auteur qui arrive en révision ; nous ne sommes pas en première ligne, mais on va surveiller et participer. Les liens entre Microsoft et l’État, c’est bien sûr quelque chose que nous n’allons pas lâcher. Deux nouvelles questions parlementaires, à l’Assemblée et au Sénat, ont d’ailleurs été posées, suite à Cash Investigation, sur le contrat avec le ministère de la Défense – qui vient de répondre à l’une, en expliquant qu’il y aurait un bilan risque-opportunités, dont nous avons demandé la communication au titre de la loi Cada.

    Nous n’allons pas manquer d’activités dans les prochaines années. Il reste beaucoup de travail à accomplir pour faire du monde informatique un endroit où il fait bon vivre.

    #logiciels_libres #april

  • just for the record
    http://www.radiopanik.org/emissions/les-promesses-de-l-aube/just-for-the-record

    On estime la contribution sur Wikipedia non représentative de la population. Environs 90% des contributeurs sont des hommes, blanc, d’une trentaine d’année. L’histoire se répète alors quant à l’écriture de l’Histoire et le partage des savoirs.

    Just For The Record est un projet questionnant la représentation des genres dans les nouveaux médias et les outils d’écriture/de partage du savoir tels que Wikipédia, et l’influence de cette représentation sur l’écriture de l’histoire et du savoir.

    Pour approcher ces questions et encourager plus de diversité en ligne, Just For The Record propose une série de rencontres thématiques à partir de janvier 2016, avec des invité·e·s, des présentations et des sessions d’édition collectives sur Wikipedia.

    Les ateliers sont mixtes. (...)

    #wikiperia #feminisme #genre #logiciels_libres #histoire
    http://www.radiopanik.org/media/sounds/les-promesses-de-l-aube/just-for-the-record_03211__1.mp3

  • Olivier Ertzscheid : « Aucune technologie sociale n’est neutre » – Le Comptoir
    https://comptoir.org/2016/11/18/olivier-ertzscheid-aucune-technologie-sociale-nest-neutre

    Auteur de plusieurs travaux sur l’identité numérique et la publication en ligne, Olivier Ertzscheid est maître de conférences en sciences de l’information et de la communication à l’université de Nantes. Il contribue à populariser les débats contemporains autour du numérique et des nouvelles technologies en utilisant les réseaux sociaux ou par l’intermédiaire de son blog, Affordance. Défenseur du logiciel libre, observateur compulsif de l’évolution de notre société et très critique du rapport aux nouvelles technologies qu’entretiennent nos politiques, il a aimablement accordé un entretien au Comptoir autour de ces questions.

    #technologies_numériques #réseaux_sociaux #éducation_nationale #logiciels_libres

  • Salut à Toi 0.6.1
    http://www.goffi.org/blog/goffi/08e8ea05-5d88-4a6f-a13b-eb6e548d65de

    Salut à tous, la version 0.6.1 de Salut à Toi vient de sortir, et elle est conséquente malgré son numéro de version mineur. La prochaine version — qui est déjà bien entamée — sera la version « grand public » que nous annonçons depuis des années, autrement dit une version que nous voulons suffisamment stable pour être utilisée au quotidien, et suffisamment facile à installer pour être disponible pour un large public. Vous pouvez toujours vous référer au journal des modifications (changelog) ou au dépôt pour avoir le détail, mais voici quelques unes des nouveautés et corrections principales :

    plugin d’import extensible avec « importeurs » pour Dotclear et DokuWiki. Notez bien que grâce à l’utilisation des standards, ça peut vous être utile même si vous n’utilisez pas SàT pour afficher votre blog (c’est compatible (...)

    #xmpp #SàT #décentralisation #logiciels_libres #réseaux_sociaux #messagerie_instantanée

  • Spéciale cryptographie, chiffrement - L’Echo des Gnous - Chtinux

    Si t’as rien à cacher, pourquoi fermes tu la porte des toilettes ?

    L’écho des Gnous c’est l’émission consacrée au logiciel Libre et à la culture libriste,diffusée chaque dimanche soir de 19h à 20h sur Radio Campus à Lille (106,6 FM).
En alternance chaque semaine la Face A (Les Actualités du monde du libre) et Face B (Une heure, un sujet sur le libre)

    #Radio #Radios_libres #Logiciels_libres #GNU #Firefox #audio

    • This paper presents the largest study to date on gender bias, where we compare acceptance rates of contributions from men versus women in an open source software community. Surprisingly, our results show that women’s contributions tend to be accepted more often than men’s. However, when a woman’s gender is identifiable, they are rejected more often. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.

      #sexisme #logiciels_libres #informatique #github #femmes

    • Lu en diagonal, l’étude se heurte à la difficulté de ne pas faire d’étude in situ avec des interviews et n’analyse que des données, comme par exemple sur github savoir quel #genre est vraiment déclaré.

      Ce qu’il en ressort dans tous les cas est que les décideurs finaux sont des hommes. Donc, soit il faut se battre soit il faut se battre, et c’est fatiguant ce mur construit de préjugés sexistes tenaces qui explique le pourquoi du désengagement des femmes, la vie est courte.

      The most obvious illustration is the underrepresentation of women in open source; in a 2013 survey of the more than 2000 open source developers who indicated a gender, only 11.2% were women (1). In Vasilescu and colleagues’ study of Stack Overflow, a question and answer community for programmers, they found “a relatively ’unhealthy’ community where women disengage sooner, although their activity levels are comparable to men’s” (2).
      These studies are especially troubling in light of recent research which suggests that diverse software development teams are more productive than homogeneous teams (3).

      Yet another explanation is that women are held
      to higher performance standards than men, an explanation supported by Gorman and Kmec’s analysis of the general workforce (23)

      1/ L. Arjona-Reina, G. Robles, S. Dueas, The floss2013 free/libre/open source survey (2014).
      3/ B. Vasilescu, et al., CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI (ACM, 2015), pp. 3789–3798
      23/ E. H. Gorman, J. A. Kmec, Gender & Society 21, 828 (2007).

      #data_gender #genre
      Et merci pour le signalement @rastapopoulos

  • Numérique à l’école : partenariat entre le Ministère de l’Éducation nationale et Microsoft (MEN)
    http://www.education.gouv.fr/cid96030/numerique-a-l-ecole-partenariat-entre-le-ministere-de-l-education-nat

    Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, ministre de l’Éducation nationale, de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche et Alain Crozier, président de Microsoft France ont signé un partenariat renforçant l’accompagnement proposé par Microsoft dans le cadre du Plan Numérique à l’École en cours de déploiement.

    #éducation #Microsoft #TICE #NTIC #Plan_Numérique_à_l'École #relations_école_entreprise #apprentissage_du_code #formation_des_enseignant.e.s #jeux_sérieux #réseaux_sociaux #ma_maîtresse_dans_le_cloud #e-Éducation

    Partenariat Microsoft/Education nationale : la grogne monte (ZDNet)
    http://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/partenariat-microsoft-education-nationale-la-grogne-monte-39831982.htm

    Recours et menace de plainte après l’accord entre Microsoft et l’Éducation nationale (Numérama)
    http://seenthis.net/messages/451812#message455499

    Accord Microsoft-Éducation nationale : le Libre offre déjà des alternatives (Framablog)
    http://seenthis.net/messages/435629

    Microsoft, l’Éducation nationale et les solutions ouvertes (Toolinux)
    http://seenthis.net/messages/456324

    #open_source #logiciels_libres

  • Using OpenStreetMap Data with Open-Source GIS | Markieta | Cartographic Perspectives

    http://cartoperspectives.org/index.php/journal/article/view/cp71-markieta/138

    INTRODUCTION

    For many, free and open-source data and software represents accessibility to otherwise inaccessible geospatial workflows in terms of cost and availability. Commercial data used in geographic information systems (GIS) is available through a relatively small number of merchants or vendors, which produce highly accurate, precise, and detailed information. This is produced, however, at a cost that many small and large businesses, private consultants, and startups cannot afford. Open-source data, such as the volunteer geographic information on OpenStreetMap (OSM), represents a community effort to build one of the best web maps, and subsequently the best GIS database, available for free to the public. OpenStreetMap is a web-based map to which any registered user can submit data. These updates, over time, populate the now extensive web map that is the OpenStreetMap. At the same time, the data that lives on the OpenStreetMap can be downloaded and used inside of a GIS for geospatial analysis, cartographic rendering, and other geo-related tasks.

    There are various workflows for extracting and consuming the data that is made available by the OpenStreetMap project. One of these methods is outlined in this tutorial. This tutorial will take Mac OSX users through a typical setup of a local PostgreSQL database, downloading and parsing raw OpenStreetMap data, and querying the database to extract data for use in QGIS, an open-source GIS package. Upon completing this tutorial, users will have hit the ground running, with the ability to run spatial queries—such as locating all the coffee shops within 500 metres of a subway station—or building cartographically pleasing reference map books with data that is of interest to the map reader.
    THIS TUTORIAL WILL COVER THE FOLLOWING:

    Access and browse an OSM data repositories
    Download a subset (often called an “extract”) of the planet.osm data package
    Install PostgreSQL (object-relational database system)
    Install PostGIS for use with PostgreSQL (spatial database extension for PostgreSQL)
    Install and utilize osm2pgsql (converts OSM data for use in the PostgreSQL database)
    Install QGIS and its dependencies (GIS package)
    Query and add data in QGIS from PostGIS/PostgreSQL

    #qgis #gis #osm #logiciels_libres #cartographie

  • Journée d’hommage à François Horn - 27 novembre 2015
    http://clerse.univ-lille1.fr/spip.php?article1425&lang=fr

    De la socio-économie des logiciels à l’analyse de la de la gratuité dans un système capitaliste : itinéraires de recherches.

    Journée d’hommage à François HORN

    27 novembre 2015
    CLERSÉ - Bât. SH2, salle du conseil

    Maitre de conférences au CLERSÉ, François Horn a été l’un des pionniers de la socio-économie. Membre fondateur de la Revue Française de Socio-économie, ses recherches sur les mondes de production des logiciels et sur le fonctionnement des communautés construites autour des logiciels libres ont été particulièrement fructueuses. Elles ont permis d’ouvrir des pistes de réflexion très riches sur la nature de la relation salariale capitaliste et sur les formes qui s’en écartent. Chercheur engagé, François Horn a également posé les bases d’une réflexion plus large sur des notions comme celles de « #communs » ou de « #gratuité ».

    – 9h30 – 10h00 : introduction Sébastien Fleuriel – Philippe Vervaeke
    – 10h00 - 12h00 : Socioéconomie et interdisciplinarité : quelles enseignements et quelles perspectives ?
    – 13h30 – 15h30 : Des communautés de production des #logiciels_libres aux "communs"
    – 15h45 – 17h45 : Comment être chercheur et militant aujourd’hui ?

    pour les copains de #SPIP qui sont sur Lille… c’est vendredi

  • IRC, Slack etc. => de plus en plus de projets open-source utilisent cet outil privateur, c’est triste…
    Slack
    http://slack.com

    que peut-on faire pour réhabiliter #irc ?

    ZNC, un proxy irc permanent, à installer sur un serveur
    http://wiki.znc.in/ZNC

    ZNC, an advanced IRC bouncer that is left connected so an IRC client can disconnect/reconnect without losing the chat session.

    irccloud, la même chose en Saas (et pas libre)
    https://www.irccloud.com

    gcu.io
    http://gcu.io

    il existe aussi un clone libre de Slack :

    Mattermost
    http://www.mattermost.org

    Mattermost is an open source, on-prem Slack-alternative

    #logiciels_libres #communication #outils