Resolution talk:Wikimedia Foundation Guiding Principles/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Ezalvarenga in topic Freedom and open source
Content deleted Content added
Ezalvarenga (talk | contribs) |
Ezalvarenga (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
"As an organization, we strive to use open source tools over proprietary ones, although we use proprietary or closed tools (such as software, operating systems, etc.) where there is currently no open-source tool that will effectively meet our needs." - Is there a requirement and process in place which forces people to publish an evaluation which open-source tools were considered and tested for a task in order to identify which specific functionality was only provided by closed-source tools? --[[User:AKlapper (WMF)|AKlapper (WMF)]] ([[User talk:AKlapper (WMF)|talk]]) 18:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC) |
"As an organization, we strive to use open source tools over proprietary ones, although we use proprietary or closed tools (such as software, operating systems, etc.) where there is currently no open-source tool that will effectively meet our needs." - Is there a requirement and process in place which forces people to publish an evaluation which open-source tools were considered and tested for a task in order to identify which specific functionality was only provided by closed-source tools? --[[User:AKlapper (WMF)|AKlapper (WMF)]] ([[User talk:AKlapper (WMF)|talk]]) 18:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC) |
||
: |
: |
||
:Well, maybe that is my impression because I work remotely, but I've seen some proprietary files been shared and proprietary softwares being used when we could have free software. For instance, microsoft documents or apple softwares. And I've heard the wifi network in SF office works better with apple stuff, which is kind of weird - I |
:Well, maybe that is my impression because I work remotely, but I've seen some proprietary files been shared and proprietary softwares being used when we could have free software. For instance, microsoft documents or apple softwares. And I've heard the wifi network in SF office works better with apple stuff, which is kind of weird - I've visited SF office only once and I checked that, but I've heard the same from other online meetings. For pragmatical reasons, sometimes I know using some closed softwares can deliver things faster tho. --[[User:Ezalvarenga|Ezalvarenga]] ([[User talk:Ezalvarenga|talk]]) 19:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 19:39, 19 March 2013
Freedom and open source
"As an organization, we strive to use open source tools over proprietary ones, although we use proprietary or closed tools (such as software, operating systems, etc.) where there is currently no open-source tool that will effectively meet our needs." - Is there a requirement and process in place which forces people to publish an evaluation which open-source tools were considered and tested for a task in order to identify which specific functionality was only provided by closed-source tools? --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 18:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Well, maybe that is my impression because I work remotely, but I've seen some proprietary files been shared and proprietary softwares being used when we could have free software. For instance, microsoft documents or apple softwares. And I've heard the wifi network in SF office works better with apple stuff, which is kind of weird - I've visited SF office only once and I checked that, but I've heard the same from other online meetings. For pragmatical reasons, sometimes I know using some closed softwares can deliver things faster tho. --Ezalvarenga (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)