278
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by 0x815@feddit.org to c/europe@feddit.org

The petitioner calls for the European Union to actively develop and implement a Linux-based operating system, termed ‘EU-Linux’, across public administrations in all EU Member States.

This initiative aims to reduce dependency on Microsoft products, ensuring compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and promoting transparency, sustainability, and digital sovereignty within the EU.

The petitioner emphasizes the importance of using open-source alternatives to Microsoft 365, such as LibreOffice and Nextcloud, and suggests the adoption of the E/OS mobile operating system for government devices. The petitioner also highlights the potential for job creation in the IT sector through this initiative.

[Edit typo.]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] intelisense@lemm.ee 77 points 1 week ago

Why not support OpenSuse instead of starting from scratch? Mature, EU based, enterprise ready... it checks all the boxes IMHO.

[-] varyingExpertise@feddit.org 54 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Don't confuse honest technical motivations with "technical motivations" here. Starting new projects to grab EU funding is a lot more profitable for the individual companies that get to take part in them. Especially when failure is an option in the end.

I'm not saying that's the case, but I have experienced one or two EU funded project here and there that didn't really make efforts to make the jump into a market viable product in the end.

[-] aleq@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

I don't think there's any clear path for the petitioner here to land such a deal if the proposal was accepted, it's just a very short petition urging development of an EU linux distro?

[-] troed@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago

This is surely more about packaging of apps on top of something that exists rather than creating something new. A huge bonus would however be a way to pay open source developers working on the tools deemed necessary to include in such a distribution.

[-] Tobberone@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

It would have to be more than that. If it's supposed to be backed by EU there would have to be an agency responsible for it's development and security. The moniker "EU certified" would require some sort of code evaluation and certification agency. As such it would become rather powerful.

I think it's a good idea, the OS would give the market a focus and allow for a collected development effort without excluding anyone active today from participating. Kinda like what I think Android was, without the risk of lock-in as it would be government funded.

The big question is if this would be within the current EU mandate, though.

[-] Matriks404@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Most probably it will be based on the existing Linux distribution like openSUSE, anyway, do I don't see anything wrong with that approach.

[-] swab148@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

Hannah Montana

[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Not even my distro of choice and I thought the exact same thing.

Makes more sense to me to do exactly that.

And on the side, do something like Germany's Sovereign Tech Fund to support other FOSS projects.

[-] jimmy90@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

yeah there will still be support/infra businesses needed to keep digital governance going just a matter of which is better value

i do think policies should be biassed towards open software/processes/protocols that can run on any platform

this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2024
278 points (98.6% liked)

Europe

1502 readers
431 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS