Thanks Anita, Regis and Marco for your comments and editions.
There are a couple of comments from Anita, once resolved, I am happy to be submitted. Just for the record, it may be a good idea (similar to what Regis posted from software heritage foundation), to publish the final submitted version to the mailing list.
Kind regards
Saber
On Mon, 2 Feb 2026 at 00:56, Marco Bernasocchi <ma...@qgis.org> wrote:
Thanks all for all the input. I'm just back from Fossdem where this subject was quite present.
I've added all my points and Anita has been reviewing the whole submition.
I would go over all corrections tomorrow evening and then submit on tuesday mornings in the PSC' name. Is that ok with you (especially Saber, you put a lot of work in there?
Thanks for those examples. They are very concise and nicely worded.
I think QGIS is not a generic tool and can be linked with some of the EU specific policies (e.g. EUDR, Data Spaces, Inspire) and highlight the importance of it from those aspects.
The format of response can change, but first we need to gather all the ideas/comments in one place.
Kind regards
Saber
On Mon, 26 Jan 2026 at 14:10, Régis Haubourg <re...@qgis.org> wrote:
Hi there,
I am following the freedesktop foundations mailing
list [0], which is dedicated to collaboration between open
source projects.
They pushed a response to europe with many
interesting points. The form of the document is really nice to
read and summarized with a short operational recommandations.
Thanks for your interest. I have shared with the
interested parties a document for the draft response. Feel
free to share further and add your comments/ideas.
Kind regards
Saber
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 at
13:19, Marco Bernasocchi via QGIS-PSC <qgis...@lists.osgeo.org>
wrote:
Hi All,
I've also started reading this in detail
an preparing some notes.
@Régis Haubourg you
had a collaborative MD hedgehog somewhere?
Hi,
I agree too that we need to raise our voices. I
had a deep look, and fitting into European
formalism is not that easy, but worth the try.
I also think that we should debate what could
be pragmatically improved with european public
policies regarding our project.
From my corner, having been on the side of
public funder, contributor in a company, and now
benevolent in a research institute that uses QGIS,
I see these bottlenecks :
- The IT culture around open source is very
low, and many IT departement, or even public
market try to fit open source business into the
mold of closed source habits. Europe could improve
things by a directive that forces countries to
change their public market rules to allow open
source service buying for any contract. This would
secure a lot of contracts. And allow those
contracts to be more agile, because open source
moves fast.
- The cyber stuff pushes us back into a vendor
pattern, where we are a lot more responsible of
our distribution packages than the GPL licence for
our own code says. This increases infra and
administrative tasks a lot, and only big projects
can follow the flow and our obligation. The CRA
open source stewardship stuff releases the legal
pressure, but customers will still treat open
source as vendors and will expect the same level
of reactivity over disclosures. That means we need
to secure our package process, anticipate scanner
issues, have a proactive security strategy. That
means more QGIS.org funded work in the long run.
What can Europe do? Find ways to secure the
funding of open source stewards, but how?
Communication and budget helpers can help, but it
is already done currently. If we are in a new IT
cold war, I would be in favor of a tax on numeric
giants that would be funding open source
foundations. The real political question would
then be the way this money can be redistributed (
I'd rather let the economy find its way and not
depend too much on polical choices, but I'm afraid
that doesn't work fast enough) .
- Github centralization fears me too. Funding
codeberg sufficiently so that they are strong
enough to allow project have decent CI minutes, on
par features, so that open source project can grow
without paying the AI/closed system toll in Europe
would also be necessary. An open source tool, with
one majors strong public funded instance.
- Renewing the motivation to contribute to
open source in schools. I think modern centralized
IT platform, and AI move contributors away from
the project. I can only see a public educational
program to mitigate this. Open source basics,
contribution basics should be pushed in
educational programs (in France, a team is doing a
great job currently with a long term strategy
based on open source and commons : https://www.education.gouv.fr/feuilles-de-route-450426
) . To me Europe should also launch a funded
program alike the Google Summer of Code, publicly
funded.
- Finally, Europe should push rules to forbid
IT tools that block real interoperability and lock
users in companies in closed ecosystem. We have
shy initiatives around RGPD data portability.
Europe should go further and set up a "vendor
locking" score, added to all the IT audits I see.
@Saber if you take the lead to write something,
maybe we could share a collaborative pad to gather
our notes and ideas?
Best regards
Régis
On 1/21/26 08:49, Andreas Neumann via QGIS-PSC
wrote:
Yes - I agree it is
important.
It is pretty obvious
for us (and the European governments), that
the US government (with a lot of influence on
the US economy) is not anymore a reliable
partner. So I believe Open Source and other
European software alternatives to US
commercial software where Europe is dependent
on is probably of quite some importance.
PSC will try to submit
something before the deadline.
Thanks a lot for bringing
the topic, I submitted my feedback as an
individual.
Now I strongly suggest the
PSC to do so as well for QGIS. Because
from the way the call for evidence is
worded, it is very obvious (and explicit
even) that it's preliminary work for a new
a new law on open source.
QGIS has this unique ability
to trickle down on so many disciplines,
and in the end on the life of people
*If the EU is putting open
source software on its strategic road
map*, this could mean securing new funding
for QGIS. And it would benefit to the QGIS
project worldwide.
And it could also help to
deter side effects of this future
regulation. What I mean by that, it would
be cool to avoid the same burden as the
Cyber Resilience Act(CRA)
P.S: The deadline for
submitting a feedback is on 3 February, so
it's getting closer. [1]
P.P.S: I also recently
suggested the creation of a Europe QGIS
user group with potential perks for the EU
[2]