All right. You ready? Yes. Perfect. Then let's dive into this. Hello and welcome to the Software Freedom Podcast.
This podcast is presented to you by the Free Software Foundation Europe. We are a charity that
empowers users to take control of technology. I am Bonnie Mehring and I am here with my colleague Alex
today. Hello Bonnie. Nice to be here again. Nice to have you. So we have done this several times now.
You want to tell us what the topic is today? Yes, we want to talk about Free Software stacks in Europe.
You forgot a Free Software software stacks. Indeed. Okay. I am sorry. Not, just Free Software stacks. Yes.
That's how we would call them the whole episode. That will be fun. Yes. Okay. But before we dive
into this whole debate surrounding the Free Software software stacks, I would love for us to cover
a bit of the framework and the background around them. Can you give us some idea what we are talking
about when we are mentioning the word Free Software software stacks? Sure. So a couple of years ago,
a debate about digital sovereignty started. And this digital sovereignty debate also came with some
practical solutions, implementations, and one of those are software stacks. So all our administrations
across Europe do need, let's say, core infrastructure and also on the other hand, software stacks that
help them to follow their administrative tasks. So an office solution. And those kinds of office
solutions are part of such a so-called software stack. So it comes with several solutions. You
want to have video calls. You want to have a writer. You want to have a calendar and so on.
And all of these solutions need to be like in the upper rebel. They need to be integrated so that you
can from your calendar directly send the email or start a voice call with your colleagues. And this
basically or could be basically such a software stack. And all of these software stacks in
light of digital sovereignty are discussed in member states of the European Union as well as
in the European Union itself by the European Commission as well in the parliament in the institutions.
So and the institutions itself, but also administrations, EU, national, regional, local level,
do need such office solutions. And they want to have digital sovereign solutions. And for this,
we do recommend to use Free Software for obvious reasons. What French Free Software stack?
The example for this, how this could look like as this is already very much implemented,
can you give us some background here as well and maybe make this a bit more practical?
Sure. So again, so the debate about digital sovereignty is not very new. It started with
final lines first term. And there we started to debate this digital sovereignty and also already
at this time, we have seen that there are initiatives in several member states where they started to
develop or procure Free Software solutions, particularly made for administrations to allow them
to work in a sovereign environment. And yeah, basically using their own solutions tailored to
their own needs. And for this, they often used Free Software. And also at the same time,
code repositories emerged. So we have seen, for example, in Italy that they came up as a free
software code repository dedicated for administrations. So we are administrations that came up as a
Free Software solution for a specific need, shared those solutions in such repositories that other
administrations could pick them and also reuse them. Obviously, this needs to be Free Software
since the four freedoms of Free Software to use study, share and improve, allow in the
availability, allow sharing and allow that it could be used in as many workstations. Yeah, one
one, for example. So, but also we have seen initiatives in France, in Germany and in other member
states. However, all of this is mainly piecework. It's not really connected to each other. So Italy
does it, France does it, Germany does it, but they do not really collaborate. So and that's one of
the main issues we see that there are initiatives in member states that are quite okay, let's say it,
but the thing is that they, yeah, they basically in their silo, they work on their own,
and for this they are also practical reasons. The very first one is a language thing, but in general,
I'd say a writer, if translated, could be used by every administration, right? So the needs
and the back end is basically always the same. It's just about like making the front and
the translated end to the language. Exactly, and also like it's also about design, so you want to
change logos and stuff like this, right? So, but in general, the solution is always the same.
So, and this is basically where we are. So in Germany, for example, the Center for Digital
Sovereignty (ZenDiS), this is basically a company founded by the government itself, started to come up as
office solution, which is called OpenDesk. We see similar approaches in France,
last week is a call over there, and yeah, and as said, we see piece work here and there and every
member state. We see in particular discussions in every member state, and these discussions have
been speed up since the Trump administration and for obvious reasons. However, it often remains on
such a discussion level, and also in particular, the collaboration cross-border remains more of an
idea instead of like a practical approach at this stage. So, and here a debate, I'd say, one
one and a half year ago, started in the U.K. Parliament, where the so-called EuroStack was
debated initiative by Francesca Prier, for example, who came up with this idea to have such
a European approach towards this, right? So, to like, let these member states initiatives
collaborate and to come up with, yeah, obviously, a European stack, which is then available and
usable and also useful for administrations across Europe, no matter if it's a European,
national, regional, local level. And here the question is, how should such a stack look like?
And here we can see that in the beginning of the debate, it was very much attached to the idea
of coming up with a Free Software solution towards this. Since it's obvious, again, the four
freedoms, you study share and improve, allow us that it's very easy and also basically the only
practical approach towards allowing collaboration across border. However, in the last years,
the debate slightly shifted away from the Free Software idea towards more like European
ideas, let's say it, and there was like a slogan which came up just recently by European.
So, and with this idea, it's more going into the direction that digital sovereignty is everything,
but it's coming from Europe. And not that much if it should be Free Software anymore. So, and that's
one of the main issues we see, but also on the other hand, again, that there is not really
collaboration happening. So, we see in some parts, collaboration, for example, France and Germany
try a collaboration with the last wheat and open desk, so these are solutions. And they want to come
up as a right on solution, which is then shared between both steps, so to say, and could be
integrated in open desk as well as in last week. But again, we see here only two member states
collaborating. And we do not really know how this collaboration should further be enlarged. And
also, we do not really see if it's going out of this like bilateral collaboration. And if it's
we are going to more towards the European approach. This is the state of the debate at the moment.
And what we are trying and also like in procurement and funding debates is to work towards the idea
to stimulate and not subsidize and collaborations across Europe so that the European Union should see
and analyze where in Europe we see developments of Free Software solutions and how they could
collaborate with others doing something similar or who have similar needs at the same time,
bringing them together and making them collaborate. Because this is the advantage of Free Software
that we can collaborate, that we can share resources. And by that, not only come up with the best
solution, but also like particularly on the mid and long run, this is how we can save money.
And this is also how we can be ultimately digital sovereign, right? When we have our own free
software solution, which we can adapt at any time, which we can make it available to every
administration. And by that, we have the control over our own technology or administrations have
the control over their own technology and are able to like change it and adapt it to the specific
needs. So, and this is basically what we want to try to advocate for at the moment. The
this collaboration is stimulated by the European Union and also that member states initiatives are
not being closed down since we have a European solution for this. No, we want these initiatives
in member states, but we want them to collaborate with others in order to have an indoor operable,
European software stack. And that would be our idea of such a Free Software,
software stack on the European level. I was so happy that you mentioned the word Free Software,
software stack. Anyway, okay. So, you mentioned several arguments. Basically, it all comes down
to that we are asking or demanding an coordinated effort. So, I do believe the coordination
should be stimulated. So, it's not that we should start this, I don't know, an approach,
where we say the next five years, we do this and this and this and this. It should still remain
flexible. Also, member states should be able to do whatever they need at the moment. However,
the core idea always must be that it's an indoor operable and that they at least know what's
happening in other member states and that they try to collaborate whenever there is a need to
collaborate. So, let's assume Germany and Italy are working on the same thing. Let's say a video
conferencing tool at the moment and then the European Union knows about this and goes there and say,
look, Italy, Germany, you are both working on the same thing. Don't you want to collaborate?
So, why do you want to come up with two solutions that are different? Let's collaborate here.
Like, if there are good reasons, for example, for Italy and France to say, on this, we
don't want to collaborate that there's no force to do so. That's the one thing, but also,
let's use the example of Jitsi and Big Blue Button. So, we want that Jitsi and Big Blue Button
are out there for administrations and then administration can pick whatever they do believe is
the best solution for them. However, it is important that both video conferencing solutions work
together. So, there is a possibility for the ones using Big Blue Button also being able to
communicate with the ones using Jitsi without any major issues, right? So, it should be easy
to collaborate cross-border with other administrations even if they use other Free Software solutions.
So, it's not, and this is, I think the core idea here, it's not about this one stack so that
everyone uses this one and only solution. It's more about that we integrate all the existing
solutions out there and making them in the upper level that both of them can communicate.
And for this, we need open standards, we need open APIs, and ultimately Free Software in order to
allow this collaboration. And this is what I mean, it's like stimulating it and making it happen
that this cross-border collaboration could happen. And this means, let's say, Germany and France
are working with the Jitsi solution Italy and Spain are working with Big Blue Button.
Those two countries should come up with their Big Blue Button or Jitsi solution.
And then the union should step in and make sure that both of these solutions can talk to each other.
Now, I think I understood the thing or the frame. Let's say the idea. Now, I understood the idea.
You have to be behind this argument of collaboration and stimulating collaboration.
So, it's more about that there's still a wide choice, but that we can actually still work
together and have the interoperability. Exactly. So, we don't procure this one European stack for
every administration across all over Europe. We still allow national or regional or local ideas
and also like depending on their needs, whatever they need. So, they should have, ultimately,
every administration should have software tailored to their needs. However, this software still needs
to be interoperable with other solutions of other administrations that have another focus,
let's say. So, and for this, it's very important to not say like this is the one and only
solution for everyone, but we want to have several solutions being able to compete, to be innovative
and to allow also like further development. And then administrations can say, I am going to
migrate my system now over to a GT because I've seen this is working way better for me.
And this should be easy so they should be able to go to a code repository, for example,
and say, let's integrate this and remove the big to button or the other way around.
Or they say, I am totally happy with my big to button. However, I acknowledge that the people
over there are using GT because they started the development, I don't know, five years ago.
Why should they now switch everything? So, for this, they need to be interoperable. So,
it needs to be able for them to still communicate via several software solutions. And this should
be all part of the stack. So, now we talked about a bit about the arguments that VZ and the points
that we demand or give voice to. How is this received and what's the current, how do you think
it's going? Because we already talked about the current debate surrounding all of this by European
dimension and all of this. Let's bring this together. Where are we heading Alex?
So, and that's yeah, that's basically one of the issues I see at the moment. So, while it was like,
let's say a couple of years ago, the idea to have such a European solution was very received.
People understood why there is a need for this. But this also at the same time led to national
debates. And we can see this very clearly in Germany at the moment where they want to come
up with a German stack. So, and here I fear that we end up in silos instead of like collaborating.
So, I said it's a good idea if every member state has their own approach to things. However,
again, if someone is working on such a stack, let's say France and Germany need a writer,
so why shouldn't they collaborate on this? So, and the more we go towards this, the more we can
collaborate, the more we can have shared procurement, even cross-border shared procurement,
and by thus we can build on the benefits of Free Software and, for example, save money on the
mid and long run. But if we now go and say, we come up with 27, sorry, if we now start to come
up with a own software stack in each member state, then it's very more difficult to achieve this
collaboration, to achieve this interoperability, because then everyone is going back to the silo,
working on their own, saying like, now we have this shiny national stack, but how is this
interoperability with others? Why didn't you collaborate on the procurement or development of
bits of these stacks where you see like other member states have similar needs at the moment?
And this is what I fear at the moment, so this is shifting away from like this European idea,
this European software stack, which is coming with several solutions. However, this could end up in,
yeah, national software stacks that are maybe nice to have for this member state,
but not too nice for like a European approach towards this, also the Buy European debate.
So decision makers more and more want to be independent from in particular US tech,
which is reasonable, and which is also good idea, I do believe. However, if we then just switch
the vendor lock in from US to European union companies, that won't help us. So the simple idea of
buying European doesn't mean that it's interoperable, but doesn't mean that it is Free Software.
So and this is something which we see in the debate that there is a shift from a way of this
Free Software thing towards a general by European idea. So and this by European doesn't mean that
there is collaboration, it just means pick something from European company. And there are also
European companies that do not really value the idea of Free Software, for example. So this means
you can easily end up in another vendor lock in, which is a European vendor lock in,
which won't help you in the mid and long run. It might help with some problems, for example,
that it's hosted in the European union, which is a good idea, but however, it's not coming with
four freedoms to use that to share and improve. But just this idea of like whatever comes from
Europe is at the same time so right. And this is not the case. And this is something which we try to
counter in the debate saying first Free Software as something global. Second, you do not want to run
in a European vendor lock in. And for this, ultimately, you always have to say it needs to be free
software. So best case is you buy Free Software in Europe. However, if the Free Software is coming
from somewhere else, also fun. As there are the four freedoms and they guarantee the access to the
software. Precisely. And also here we need to say we need to enlarge our capacities step by step.
So it's also not that we have millions of companies in Europe that have competitive solutions.
We have to stimulate that market in order to come up with Free Software companies in Europe.
That can provide such solutions. And for this, we need to invest in Dutch companies and not
in random European companies that bring you basically in another vendor lock.
Do you have the feeling that those arguments are paid attention to or what do you think it's happening
here? So this is it's very hard to say. I see that there are more and more arguments and more
decision makers shifting away from the, let's say, openness towards the u-p-ness of something.
So it's a slight shift at the moment. It's not that there is a majority for this already.
At the same time, there's also not a majority for the Free Software idea. So this is our fight.
We will definitely have this fight in the upcoming procurement reform. We also have this
find around precisely those stacks. And also here, maybe this is a very interesting point.
I think a couple of weeks ago, we discussed the NGI funding case where the funding for
Free Software was removed to benefit AI. And this is also such a shift. However, here in the
European Commission, they say we don't want to support Pittsburgh, but rather contribute to such a
stack. So and then at the same time, we see that they are shifting money away from Free Software
towards AI. So this is not to another thing that we often see mass births driving such debates
from quite a while. So we have the bio-pinsing, we have everything needs to be AI. And by
thus Free Software is pushed more and more out of the debate. So and this is something which we
need to counter. And this is also why we whenever we talk about the stacks tell everyone it needs to be
Free Software to end up in this one to basically one. So if you if you go to decision makers and talk
to them what they basically want, they talk about Free Software. So they don't name it Free Software,
but basically they want to have it in the upper levels. They want to have a server and solution
and so on and so forth. However, they are more and more shifting away from the Free Software
wording in this debate going towards other direction. And this could then ultimately mean if it's
text that you then if you in administration that wants to procure something is ending up with something
which is not Free Software, but coming from Europe and by thus it's all fine and they proceed.
So here we need to be very close in the debate and make sure that these criteria
at least always end up in a Free Software solution. So that it's not possible to procure
something else, but that you need to procure or develop Free Software in order to come up as such
as a rune solution. So we debate around the terms of Renate but it ultimately needs. And here we
try to make sure that it's always connected to for freedoms and that's that the procurement always
ends up in a Free Software solution. This will be a hard debate. I mean there are also players on the
other side who have other ideas. In particular, we see that decision makers that are
I'd say more familiar with the digital topics, more eager to understand our arguments.
However, it's also debated on high level at the moment, right? So as said,
also our final line commission president debates this in member states president,
president and chancellor's debate about sovereignty. And here we have seen in the in the
recent years we have seen shifts and these are coming basically from other lobbyists removing
those Free Software words, bringing in more loopholes in order to allow procurement of other non
Free Software solutions. And this is basically a problem and this will be a strong fight which we
will take I guess for the next years. This is a short break for our own cause. Thank you for
listening to the software freedom podcast, working for software freedom and producing podcasts
costs money. Please consider supporting us with a donation on the fsfe.org slash donate and
then the show notes. This will be a strong fight which we will take I guess for the next years
and this is where we are also very close to like the developments of sorts such stacks so we
closely follow what's happening in Germany for example or in France or in Italy to see
what the ultimately come up with. And at the moment we have seen that they found a practical
approach towards this. So they connected pretty much to their code repositories. So they say
it needs to be procured and needs to be ultimately in the code repository available. And those
code repositories then say look you can only bring in your solution if it's one of these licenses
for example and all of them are Free Software licenses. So but what happens if those rules of
these code repositories are changed. So it's a smart idea in the first place but it could also
easily end up in oh now we see that there's a solution it's not fully Free Software but how do we
print this in the code repository are we change the rules of the code repository. So if you attach
software only to the code repository without coming up with further criteria then you might end up
in a world where those code repositories might in the future also allow other non-Free Software
in these repositories and that would be a problem. So and this is the level of detailed
fight we are picking at the moment. So there are smart ideas to close loop holes but we also have
to think about the future and make sure that those loop holes are closed forever. So and these are
the debates we are running at the moment. So it's a lot of needy-queasy. We type over words we
fight over ideas and trying to again go to decision makers and make them understand that Free Software
is the only way how to come up is basically what they want. So this sounds like a lot of work to
be honest to follow up and to safeguard Free Software. I mean that's the basic argument you
brought forward is that we want to safeguard Free Software in all of those Free Software
software stacks and make sure that the loop holes are closed and not celebrating small steps but
being those who say stop. There is a potential weakness and we really need to pay attention
to this and as you already said there are several debates and several member states going on.
So well have fun Alex. Yeah yeah I do have. In this regard this is also a call to our listeners.
If you see stack debates ongoing in your member states where you say here are upcoming loop holes
please share them with us so that we can address them. So for us it's not too easy to follow
like every minus step in every member state we try to do so but for this we always need the help
of you guys and also our volunteers and for this please whenever you see something like this
please share this with us. So because this helps us to address those issues and to also like yeah
try to to modify those attempts. Also at the same time what we are doing is to look for best
practices. So if you see a very good idea in your member state how a loop hole is addressed and fixed
this is also something which is of high importance for us because then we can use this as a
best practice for other member states and tell them look this could be a solution how you can fix
this loop hole in your strategy in your law and make sure that you ultimately do come up as a free
software software. I also have a call for action in this regard as it nicely fits in with our
public money public code campaign. If you have not signed our open letter there please feel free
to do so you find the link in the show notes. Alex you want to talk about why it fits in with
public money public code. Sure I mean it's obvious it's with our public money public code initiative
we try to convince decision makers, administrations across Europe to come up with rules and in particular
also implement those rules that whenever taxpayers money is used the solution should be available
for everyone and for us obviously again Free Software is the way to go and this initiative is
very successful we even see references in laws and strategies towards this and I think it's also a
good idea to follow these principles of public money public code in order to come up with a digital
sovereign solution which is then not only tailored to your needs but where you have to control
over technology and with this campaign it's an umbrella initiative if you like which is used to go
in several different than precise debates around the stack but also about procurement funding
even in the cyber resilience act we are using those kinds of arguments so and this initiative helps
to first of all make it understandable for decision makers what this concept of Free Software means
what are the benefits and then once they understood this go into the details of specific laws
strategies whatever and try to come as close as possible towards those ideas of public money
public code however we see that there are often rules with loopholes and now it's on us to close those
loopholes so often it sets Free Software should be procured if there are not I don't know security
reasons for example so it's very hard to get away from this wording however what we propose is
if there are such security reasons then they should be explained in writing and should
be checked by another institution if they are valid and also should be it should be possible to
counter those and for this for example we can bring in the court of auditors who check if there is
a really a need to not procure Free Software and this is what I mean this closing those loopholes
so maybe we need to attach other loopholes so that we are going to this Free Software first approach
and then if administrations for whatever reason do not procure or develop Free Software then they
need to explain why they are not doing this and this this paperwork they will also understand step
by step that there are not really those kind of arguments around and going more towards the
direction of public money public code and this is why this campaign is so important and also a
nice benefit for you if you sign it you can also register for email updates and but as we will
keep you updated about our progress and also to push for public money public code across Europe.
Perfect thank you very much I like thank you very much for the time I really hope that we
get loads of best practices but I also know it's very important that we get a report of the
programs and all but yeah maybe we have some very very positive news the next time hopefully
we are working towards it yes you are okay in light of the time I would say we close it thank you
so much for being here thank you so much for taking the time and yeah walking us through the free
software software stack thanks for all these a pleasure all right this was the software freedom
podcast if you liked this episode please recommend it to your friends and rated it
stay tuned for more inspiring conversations that explore the importance of software freedom
and its impact on our digital lives this podcast is presented to you by the Free Software Foundation
Europe and we are a charity that works on promoting software freedom if you like our work like
us following up and safeguarding Free Software in the Free Software stack so please support us
you can do so by donating to us you find more information under fsfe.org/donate and if this
is financially not possible for you you can share the podcast on social media rated or
contribute to the fsfe.org as a volunteer by for example sending us best practice examples
or reporting programs you see the Free Software software stack in your country thank you so
much for listening to us and we will be back in your ears next month bye bye
hi I am Øjvind I help out as one of the producers of the software freedom podcast
along with Bonnie I work on the audio and editing for the software freedom podcast and try to make
it as nice and shiny as possible for you all using Free Software tools of course I am doing this
as a volunteer for the FSFE this is one of the ways I've found i can help with getting the message
of software freedom out there I am dropping by here to encourage you to do the same volunteer your
particular set of skills to the FSFE and help further the course of software freedom along with a great
group of helpful and kind people you can find more information on how to contribute as a volunteer
under fsfe.org/contribute see you out there