European Open Source Projects: pay once should be enough
European Community is now financing 6 different projects within the 6th Framework program related to FLOSS metrics and quality. As a matter of fact CALIBRE(mentioned) EDOS (mentioned), FLOSSMetrics (mentioned few times), FLOSSWorld, QualiPSo, QUALOS and SQO-OSS are somehow overlapping:
Complete waste of energy by rooreynolds
CALIBRE aims to coordinate te study of the characteristics of open source software projets, products and processes, distributed development, and agile methods.
EDOS – The project aims to study and solve problems associated with the production, management and distribution of open source software packages.
FLOSSWorld – It is expected that FLOSSWorld will enhance Europe’s leading role in research in the area of FLOSS and strongly embed Europe in a global network of researchers and policy makers, and the business, higher education and developer communities. FLOSSWorld will enhance the level of global awareness related to FLOSS development and industry, human capacity building, standards and interoperability and e-government issues in the geographical regions covered by the consortium.
QUALOSS objectives:
- Build the QUALOSS methode, an objective method to assess the robusteness and evolvability of open source software
.- Develop the QUALOSS platform, a tool to automate most activities when applying the QUALOSS methos
.- Validate the QUALOSS empirically on at least 50 open source projects
SQO-OSS – The project is developing a comprehensive suite of software quality assessment tools. These tools will enable the objective analysis and benchmarking of Open Source software. SQO-OSS aims to assist European software developers in improving the quality of their code, and to remove one of the key barriers to entry for Open Source software by providing scientific proof of its quality.
Many of these projects are collecting data from public open source repositories, some are working with thousands projects while others are focused on a tiny fraction of. Though all of them are supposed to collaborate with other projects investigating the same area, apparently they have no specific funds dedicated to coordination of tasks.
On the other hand collection, aggregation and correlation of data fetched by public repository is getting everyday more important both for Public Administrations and firms. The analysis is more and more complex and it is really a waste of resources to let projects overlap.
By the way looking for posts about European financed projects I happened to read the following posts. The first is from the Open Source Weblog (Matthew Aslett):
While it is not altogether clear what QualiPSo will deliver that the various existing open source promotion activities and consortia are not, it will be interesting to see the results of the CMM-related project for assessing software quality.
Other areas, such as the plan to “define a coherent family of open source software licenses†would appear to step on the toes of the OSI just a little bit.
The second, still talking about Qualipso, is from Glyn Moody:
Developing a new Capability Maturity Model-like approach to assessing the quality of OSS. This model will be discussed with CMM’s originators, the Software Engineering Institute (SEI), with a view to formalising it as an official extension of CMMI.
What? Maturity? What’s this got to do with getting people to use the ruddy stuff?
QualiPSo is launched in synergy with Europe’s technology initiatives such as NESSI and Artemis, and will leverage Europe’s existing OSS initiatives such as EDOS, FLOSSWorld (http://flossworld.org/), tOSSad (http://www.tossad.org/) and others. The project will also leverage large OSS communities such as OW2 and Morfeo.Oh, now I see: all this is just an excuse for more acronym madness. So it’s basically just a waste of money, and a missed opportunity to do something practical.
But wait:
QualiPSo is the ever largest Open Source initiative funded by the EC.
OK, make that the biggest waste of money, and biggest missed opportunity yet.
I’m definitely not a fan of the Public funded “business” model, but as Italian and European citizen I can’t be happy I am not alone. I really want to make a wish now: no more random public funded projects, please.
Roberto Galoppini, 
gaidin, and 
Flavia are discussing.
Flavia 6:59 pm on March 17, 2007 Permalink
Your post it is a kind of “mental floss”, a tentative to bring some light in the matter.
gaidin 10:41 am on March 22, 2007 Permalink
I have had a presentation of all the projects you mentionned at the beginning, and except EDOS, I’ve had the same feeling as yours : they are overlapping, and aren’t going to produce anything beside reports.
Qualipso seems a little different, though.
I must say, the weight of the industrial partners in those projects makes the topic of interests very far from what we consider “useful”, as “we” are more interested in improving the code base rather than making money, nor are we fighting a stupid US vs EC economic war.
Also, most Free Software Communities, that are not political conglomerates, have no voice to be heard. That discards in a very effective way any useful idea.
I think the only good funding for actual useful Free Software comes from Google’s Summer of code.
Roberto Galoppini 11:29 am on March 22, 2007 Permalink
I see your point Gaidin, and that is what I am concerned about: how is it possible that EC keeps accepting overlapping projects?
My suspect, and I am not alone here, is that EC is lacking of skilled evaluators, turning in random results, as its best.
I do know evaluators that recommended me to apply just for this reason. I applied twice but I have never got a single answer.
But the pie is getting bigger and bigger, and firms are not staying at the window, of course.
You mentioned firms’ dimension as an issue, and you might be right in this respect. EC recognizing that “Europe is good for SMEs and SMEs are good for Europe” is trying to make public calls for tender more accessible for small companies.
By the way you cited Google Summers’ of code, and I agree is a good example but.. while Google is a big company, they are not begging money from the State, and it makes a huge difference to me..
gaidin 4:00 pm on March 22, 2007 Permalink
About Google, the whole situation of fearing an american centric domination through what google is trying to do with the summer of code or the Library, reminds me of a joke that was circulated by email.
A kind woman from Human Ressources decided to celebrate christmas at work by giving a special meal to the employees, and a $30 voucher each. Soon, she received a complain from the non-christian employees who requested their respective holiday to be celebrated as well. Next came all the vegetarians, claiming that they were being set aside from the rest of the company because of the meat-happy special meal.
And finally, the Unions kicked in, claiming that the voucher was utterly unequal, that it should be increased for larger families ; and rather than vouchers, the fund should be better used towards a nursery for everyone instead.
The story ends with her having a nervous break-down.
Roberto Galoppini 4:18 pm on March 22, 2007 Permalink
Well, I like the story, you admit slightly off-topic indeed, and I believe that Summer of Code is definitely a good thing. We can’t say Google is running an open source business model, though, but it is contributing a lot, and that is definitely a good thing.