this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2026
196 points (99.5% liked)
Opensource
4907 readers
178 users here now
A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!
โ
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They rewrote a messenger and the entire office suite. They could've collaborated with the Germans in making OpenDesk. Imagine all the dev time going into making Forgejo federated instead of rewriting everything a different way that isn't interoperable with another government's tools.
Maybe it has to start with way, every government making their own FOSS tools, features and code getting closer and closer together until they finally merge or dump one FOSS tool over another FOSS tool. ๐คท
My thought is: at least its FOSS
It is so frustrating to see how tax payers are funding projects that reinvent the weel over and over. EU can just fund a good open source self hosted option then every country host it for it self.
IMO, it's a matter of time. They will learn eventually. We're just at the beginning and mistakes are being made and will continue to be made. However, I'm much happier with them doing is as FOSS instead of some proprietary, closed source crap that has to be rewritten for millions by some external company a politician happens to know.
Baby steps.
What does federation in forgejo offer? I mean, it's already git, you can work with different repos. I'm planning on moving my projects to self hosted instance soon. Should I look into setting up federation?
Conservatives who grumble about the inefficiency of government spending are not wrong
The problem is what they see as inefficiency. Social services, education, and a bunch of other things that are actually beneficial to society they consider a waste of money. There is overlap in what I consider inefficient and waste, but it is small. This does make the cut though.
For education, at least, I agree with the majority of (non-MAGA) Conservatives. Education should be treated like food, not like roads: government should ensure everyone has access in a diverse competitive market of providers, but not be a direct producer.
50 or 100 years ago, I could much more see the argument that education is a natural geographic monopoly. Now I firmly believe that education is suffering from lack of innovation and competition.
What do you mean by "diverse competitive market of providers"? All I can imagine is religious schools like Catholic, Presbyterian, Suuni, Shi'ite, Taoist, Satanist, and then language schools, vocational schools, universities, sport schools, etc.
Also what do you mean by a "natural geographic monopoly"? Schools are neither natural, nor geographic, nor monopolies. Take Gemany for example. It has 16 different school systems. France has one school system but schools are given quite some leeway. The Netherlands has an extremely complex system with multiple exits and entries. And as for monopolies, there are often multiple schools in the same city, town, village or neighborhood.
I'm curious to read what you mean by those statements.