Government Technology

    Digital Communities
    Industry Members

  • Click sponsor logos for whitepapers, case studies, and best practices.
  • McAfee

Russian Government IT Development Strategy: Free and Open Source Software



March 2, 2009 By

"The most promising developments in RFOSS must be selected and then we must focus on them." -- Igor Shchegolev, head of the Russian Federation's Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications

On February 25th, 2009 the principal of the Russian Federation's Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications met with representatives of Russian Free and Open Source Software (RFOSS) development companies, including VDEL, at the Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss concrete steps that can be taken by the state to support the RFOSS development process.

Igor Shchegolev, head of the Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications, declared that the focus must be on the areas of RFOSS with the highest potential. Addressing the RFOSS representatives he noted that with today's rapid world development of free and open source software, Russia must make the best use of its capabilities in this field. According to him, "the most promising developments in RFOSS must be selected and then we must focus on them."

Shchegolev also stated that there should be national centers of competence that would attract foreign developers as well as promote the movement of domestic talent to the world market.

Speaking about the idea of an exclusively Russian operating system, he called it "exotic." He admitted that similar attempts had been made in some other countries, but weren't a success.

"The idea of open source transcends any national, religious or racial regressional fictive borders," said M. Prohaska, managing director of VDEL "and puts any idea of 'national' intellectual property into its place -- history. The future belongs to interconnected world of innovation and information that open source model is based on. We are very proud and happy that the Russian government supports this view and wants to take active part in this worldwide phenomenon."

All the participants agreed that for the successful RFOSS development it is necessary for all developers to combine their efforts and to naturally establish industry associations. Shchegolev said that the Ministry is eager to participate in such a project.

Earlier Shchegolov also supported VDEL and Red Hat in their effort to create a competence center in conjunction with several Western vendors that will open in April. The main focus of the competence center will be to transfer the best practices from other countries in the implementation of open source on the government level. Other goals will include:

  • Bringing open source solutions that have proven to work to Russia
  • Making sure relevant success stories and analysis of unsuccessful stories are presented, so that Russia will try to avoid mistakes made in other places
  • Helping promote Russian products to the rest of the world
  • Helping the formation of partnerships with the world wide community
  • Making sure that Russian specific issues are included in the world wide open source projects.

Also present at the meeting were: V.P Ivannikov, RAS academician, the director of the Institute for System Programming, Y. Zhukov, the first deputy director of VNIINS, M.Prohaska, managing director of VDEL, A.V.Smirnov, director of Alt Linux, and D.V.Komissarov, adviser to the President of IT Company. Also present were the representatives of such companies as 1C, Lenovo, Integral, IBM, Parallels, R-Style, Korus Consulting, Sun Microsystems and others.

At a previous round-table discussion on IT-security, organized by the Russian Parliament Higher Technology Committee on the 11th of February, a proposal to pass all Open Source Software development work to state corporations was rejected by representatives of the Ministry of Communications and Mass Communications and almost all Russian IT associations.

"It's unacceptable that the authors of the idea consider the federal public procurement law to be the main obstacle


| More

Comments

Add Your Comment

You are solely responsible for the content of your comments. We reserve the right to remove comments that are considered profane, vulgar, obscene, factually inaccurate, off-topic, or considered a personal attack.

In Our Library

White Papers | Exclusives Reports | Webinar Archives | Best Practices and Case Studies
Digital Cities & Counties Survey: Best Practices Quick Reference Guide
This Best Practices Quick Reference Guide is a compilation of examples from the 2013 Digital Cities and Counties Surveys showcasing the innovative ways local governments are using technological tools to respond to the needs of their communities. It is our hope that by calling attention to just a few examples from cities and counties of all sizes, we will encourage further collaboration and spark additional creativity in local government service delivery.
Wireless Reporting Takes Pain (& Wait) out of Voting
In Michigan and Minnesota counties, wireless voting via the AT&T network has brought speed, efficiency and accuracy to elections - another illustration of how mobility and machine-to-machine (M2M) technology help governments to bring superior services and communication to constituents.
Why Would a City Proclaim Their Data “Open by Default?”
The City of Palo Alto, California, a 2013 Center for Digital Government Digital City Survey winner, has officially proclaimed “open” to be the default setting for all city data. Are they courageous or crazy?
View All