Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

gavinf
If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives.

This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)

Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond:

"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.”

Or Mandeni:

"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"

SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?

Gavin







_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa

5_2_2_1_rdlr_0033_2019_20.pdf (3M) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

Zoltan Szecsei
Hi Gavin/List,
This 'rant' has been around for decades (OK, maybe singular, not plural), yet it has always been in the form of an open rant, and not a direction.

As a community we have always championed user groups etc, with a handful of people making the effort, and everyone benefiting.
This is the norm, and I see it no different (in manpower effort and 'split') from energy required for past endeavors. (So no-one should be scared of getting involved).

I would like to suggest a way forward.
But this is strictly about getting Open Source to have a fair look-in, and not about the specifics of any tender or purchase.
My support is for leveling the playing field, and for exposing/wiping out badly constructed Bid specifications.

If my suggestion is bad/useless/whatever, I hope at least it does cause some debate that might turn into direction.

So,
Perhaps you could do some initial research, maybe applicable laws or policy guidance documents.
Perhaps listers working in government can point to some relevant documents on this matter.

Then find some legal-minded person to cost out a strategy, and of course make a 'feasibility of success' statement.
After that, we could have a worthwhile direction.

With a feasible direction we could try some crowd funding - or maybe even just have to make some representation (through SAGI??) to some government body with the power to change things.

I am still playing in the sand out here (Qatar), so cannot offer to help, but providing we have a direction and a crowd funding platform, I will pledge R1000 to further this cause.

Anyone else with some ideas?

Regards,
Zoltan


On 2019/09/11 14:43, Gavin Fleming wrote:
If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives. 

This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)

Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond: 

"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.” 

Or Mandeni:

"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"

SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?

Gavin






_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa

-- 

=============================================
Zoltan Szecsei GPrGISc 0031
Geograph (Pty) Ltd.
GIS and Photogrammetric Services

P.O. Box 7, Muizenberg 7950, South Africa.

Mobile: +27-83-6004028
Qatar:  +974 5083 2722     www.geograph.co.za
=============================================

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

Luncedo Ngcofe

Morning all

 

Here is my view with regards to the topic above:

·         The Open source champions should start at tertiary institutions in assisting with the implementation of use of open source software. This will create required soldiers which will form part of the government decisions in the future.

·         One of the advantages of the licenced software is the 24hrs service agreement should the user have any challenges with the software. I believe there is not guarantee availability for this for free open source software. This is where the open source should also bridge the gap as this have major impacts on government workflows should the project not solved on time.

·         One should also investigate workflow systems of government organisations in order to provide open source as a potential long term solution. Without this knowledge then it would be difficult to proposed an open source software as a solution. In this case one would need to investigate why is DRDLR preferring a licenced software. Does the open source offer the workflow capabilities for such a Department?

·         The commercial software companies once in a while visits the Departments and assesses how they can offer advance products than their competitors and do studies how would such transformation impact on the production flow of the government and thus how would they assist if such a change would take place. All this information therefore forms part of decision making towards a desirable software to use as an organisation.

·         My suggestion would be for open source compatriots to embark on such practical studies and therefore be on the stable ground when pushing for large consideration of open source software in government institutions.

·         On small scale projects, the open source software is used by government organisations.

 

Kind Regards

Luncedo Ngcofe

 

 

From: Africa [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zoltan Szecsei
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 07:19
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

Hi Gavin/List,
This 'rant' has been around for decades (OK, maybe singular, not plural), yet it has always been in the form of an open rant, and not a direction.

As a community we have always championed user groups etc, with a handful of people making the effort, and everyone benefiting.
This is the norm, and I see it no different (in manpower effort and 'split') from energy required for past endeavors. (So no-one should be scared of getting involved).

I would like to suggest a way forward.
But this is strictly about getting Open Source to have a fair look-in, and not about the specifics of any tender or purchase.
My support is for leveling the playing field, and for exposing/wiping out badly constructed Bid specifications.

If my suggestion is bad/useless/whatever, I hope at least it does cause some debate that might turn into direction.

So,
Perhaps you could do some initial research, maybe applicable laws or policy guidance documents.
Perhaps listers working in government can point to some relevant documents on this matter.

Then find some legal-minded person to cost out a strategy, and of course make a 'feasibility of success' statement.
After that, we could have a worthwhile direction.

With a feasible direction we could try some crowd funding - or maybe even just have to make some representation (through SAGI??) to some government body with the power to change things.

I am still playing in the sand out here (Qatar), so cannot offer to help, but providing we have a direction and a crowd funding platform, I will pledge R1000 to further this cause.

Anyone else with some ideas?

Regards,
Zoltan

On 2019/09/11 14:43, Gavin Fleming wrote:

If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives. 
 
This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)
 
Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond: 
 
"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.” 
 
Or Mandeni:
 
"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"
 
SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?
 
Gavin
 
 
 



 
 



_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa



-- 
 
=============================================
Zoltan Szecsei GPrGISc 0031
Geograph (Pty) Ltd.
GIS and Photogrammetric Services
 
P.O. Box 7, Muizenberg 7950, South Africa.
 
Mobile: +27-83-6004028
Qatar:  +974 5083 2722     www.geograph.co.za
=============================================


_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

Nhamo, Luxon (IWMI-South Africa)

Good day

 

Great contribution Luncedo. Moreover, we leave in a world of competition and refusing competition only brings one’s downfall. I do not understand why always seeking protection of the law, yet there changes taking place.

 

Regards,

Luxon

 

From: Africa <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Luncedo Ngcofe
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 08:05
To: Africa local chapter discussions <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

 

External Sender

 

 

Morning all

 

Here is my view with regards to the topic above:

·         The Open source champions should start at tertiary institutions in assisting with the implementation of use of open source software. This will create required soldiers which will form part of the government decisions in the future.

·         One of the advantages of the licenced software is the 24hrs service agreement should the user have any challenges with the software. I believe there is not guarantee availability for this for free open source software. This is where the open source should also bridge the gap as this have major impacts on government workflows should the project not solved on time.

·         One should also investigate workflow systems of government organisations in order to provide open source as a potential long term solution. Without this knowledge then it would be difficult to proposed an open source software as a solution. In this case one would need to investigate why is DRDLR preferring a licenced software. Does the open source offer the workflow capabilities for such a Department?

·         The commercial software companies once in a while visits the Departments and assesses how they can offer advance products than their competitors and do studies how would such transformation impact on the production flow of the government and thus how would they assist if such a change would take place. All this information therefore forms part of decision making towards a desirable software to use as an organisation.

·         My suggestion would be for open source compatriots to embark on such practical studies and therefore be on the stable ground when pushing for large consideration of open source software in government institutions.

·         On small scale projects, the open source software is used by government organisations.

 

Kind Regards

Luncedo Ngcofe

 

 

From: Africa [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zoltan Szecsei
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 07:19
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

Hi Gavin/List,
This 'rant' has been around for decades (OK, maybe singular, not plural), yet it has always been in the form of an open rant, and not a direction.

As a community we have always championed user groups etc, with a handful of people making the effort, and everyone benefiting.
This is the norm, and I see it no different (in manpower effort and 'split') from energy required for past endeavors. (So no-one should be scared of getting involved).

I would like to suggest a way forward.
But this is strictly about getting Open Source to have a fair look-in, and not about the specifics of any tender or purchase.
My support is for leveling the playing field, and for exposing/wiping out badly constructed Bid specifications.

If my suggestion is bad/useless/whatever, I hope at least it does cause some debate that might turn into direction.

So,
Perhaps you could do some initial research, maybe applicable laws or policy guidance documents.
Perhaps listers working in government can point to some relevant documents on this matter.

Then find some legal-minded person to cost out a strategy, and of course make a 'feasibility of success' statement.
After that, we could have a worthwhile direction.

With a feasible direction we could try some crowd funding - or maybe even just have to make some representation (through SAGI??) to some government body with the power to change things.

I am still playing in the sand out here (Qatar), so cannot offer to help, but providing we have a direction and a crowd funding platform, I will pledge R1000 to further this cause.

Anyone else with some ideas?

Regards,
Zoltan

On 2019/09/11 14:43, Gavin Fleming wrote:

If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives. 
 
This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)
 
Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond: 
 
"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.” 
 
Or Mandeni:
 
"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"
 
SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?
 
Gavin
 
 
 

 

 
 

 

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa

 

-- 
 
=============================================
Zoltan Szecsei GPrGISc 0031
Geograph (Pty) Ltd.
GIS and Photogrammetric Services
 
P.O. Box 7, Muizenberg 7950, South Africa.
 
Mobile: +27-83-6004028
Qatar:  +974 5083 2722     www.geograph.co.za
=============================================

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

Peter Newmarch
In reply to this post by Luncedo Ngcofe

Dear All,

 

Reading the tender, I do believe its flawed in a number of respects.

 

  1. It does not follow Government policy - Foss Policy adoption.
  2. The tender states “Unlimited GIS software license distribution for a period of three (3) years including all extensions and add-on software.” – such does not make any sense at all in era when government is attempting to save monies and cut costs. In fact it suggests no real needs assessment was even done or consideration of other software. Just a decision to renew existing software. Not everybody needs a full package or all extensions, many users can get away with a simple viewer.

 

GISc people should have no problem in understanding different software’s and if I can pick up QGis and run with it at production level in 2 days (without training), I don’t see why it’s so hard to implement. The government should simply put out its GIS needs / workflows, companies can then bring on board such matters as SAQA training, 24hr support etc (creating jobs and competition)…. – one cannot scan the market and say who does 24hr support and SAQA training and we will buy their product – that is wrong.

 

What is quite telling is the lack of even mentioning the product name in the tender, perhaps to get around procurement rules ?

 

Regards

 

Peter Newmarch

 

From: Africa <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Luncedo Ngcofe
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 08:05
To: Africa local chapter discussions <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

Morning all

 

Here is my view with regards to the topic above:

  • The Open source champions should start at tertiary institutions in assisting with the implementation of use of open source software. This will create required soldiers which will form part of the government decisions in the future.
  • One of the advantages of the licenced software is the 24hrs service agreement should the user have any challenges with the software. I believe there is not guarantee availability for this for free open source software. This is where the open source should also bridge the gap as this have major impacts on government workflows should the project not solved on time.
  • One should also investigate workflow systems of government organisations in order to provide open source as a potential long term solution. Without this knowledge then it would be difficult to proposed an open source software as a solution. In this case one would need to investigate why is DRDLR preferring a licenced software. Does the open source offer the workflow capabilities for such a Department?
  • The commercial software companies once in a while visits the Departments and assesses how they can offer advance products than their competitors and do studies how would such transformation impact on the production flow of the government and thus how would they assist if such a change would take place. All this information therefore forms part of decision making towards a desirable software to use as an organisation.
  • My suggestion would be for open source compatriots to embark on such practical studies and therefore be on the stable ground when pushing for large consideration of open source software in government institutions.
  • On small scale projects, the open source software is used by government organisations.

 

Kind Regards

Luncedo Ngcofe

 

 

From: Africa [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zoltan Szecsei
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 07:19
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

Hi Gavin/List,
This 'rant' has been around for decades (OK, maybe singular, not plural), yet it has always been in the form of an open rant, and not a direction.

As a community we have always championed user groups etc, with a handful of people making the effort, and everyone benefiting.
This is the norm, and I see it no different (in manpower effort and 'split') from energy required for past endeavors. (So no-one should be scared of getting involved).

I would like to suggest a way forward.
But this is strictly about getting Open Source to have a fair look-in, and not about the specifics of any tender or purchase.
My support is for leveling the playing field, and for exposing/wiping out badly constructed Bid specifications.

If my suggestion is bad/useless/whatever, I hope at least it does cause some debate that might turn into direction.

So,
Perhaps you could do some initial research, maybe applicable laws or policy guidance documents.
Perhaps listers working in government can point to some relevant documents on this matter.

Then find some legal-minded person to cost out a strategy, and of course make a 'feasibility of success' statement.
After that, we could have a worthwhile direction.

With a feasible direction we could try some crowd funding - or maybe even just have to make some representation (through SAGI??) to some government body with the power to change things.

I am still playing in the sand out here (Qatar), so cannot offer to help, but providing we have a direction and a crowd funding platform, I will pledge R1000 to further this cause.

Anyone else with some ideas?

Regards,
Zoltan

On 2019/09/11 14:43, Gavin Fleming wrote:

If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives. 
 
This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)
 
Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond: 
 
"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.” 
 
Or Mandeni:
 
"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"
 
SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?
 
Gavin
 
 
 

 

 
 

 

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa

 

-- 
 
=============================================
Zoltan Szecsei GPrGISc 0031
Geograph (Pty) Ltd.
GIS and Photogrammetric Services
 
P.O. Box 7, Muizenberg 7950, South Africa.
 
Mobile: +27-83-6004028
Qatar:  +974 5083 2722     www.geograph.co.za
=============================================

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

Angie Atkinson
In reply to this post by Nhamo, Luxon (IWMI-South Africa)

Good Morning All,

 

Luncedo agree whole heartedly with the tertiary institutions, but I would even go further and say that one needs to look at High Schools as well, my son’s Geography Teacher recently approached me and has wanted to start to introduce GIS to the Gr9’s as a way of making them consider that as a career path in future as a number of pupils are only taking Geography as a filler subject.

 

I think it would be great if one can start to introduce GIS and hence Open Source GIS to schools prior to Gr10 – Gr12 especially given that they are reliant on Government funding for most things.

 

Angie

 

From: Africa <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Nhamo, Luxon (IWMI-South Africa)
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 08:24
To: Africa local chapter discussions <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

Good day

 

Great contribution Luncedo. Moreover, we leave in a world of competition and refusing competition only brings one’s downfall. I do not understand why always seeking protection of the law, yet there changes taking place.

 

Regards,

Luxon

 

From: Africa <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Luncedo Ngcofe
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 08:05
To: Africa local chapter discussions <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

 

External Sender

 

 

Morning all

 

Here is my view with regards to the topic above:

  • The Open source champions should start at tertiary institutions in assisting with the implementation of use of open source software. This will create required soldiers which will form part of the government decisions in the future.
  • One of the advantages of the licenced software is the 24hrs service agreement should the user have any challenges with the software. I believe there is not guarantee availability for this for free open source software. This is where the open source should also bridge the gap as this have major impacts on government workflows should the project not solved on time.
  • One should also investigate workflow systems of government organisations in order to provide open source as a potential long term solution. Without this knowledge then it would be difficult to proposed an open source software as a solution. In this case one would need to investigate why is DRDLR preferring a licenced software. Does the open source offer the workflow capabilities for such a Department?
  • The commercial software companies once in a while visits the Departments and assesses how they can offer advance products than their competitors and do studies how would such transformation impact on the production flow of the government and thus how would they assist if such a change would take place. All this information therefore forms part of decision making towards a desirable software to use as an organisation.
  • My suggestion would be for open source compatriots to embark on such practical studies and therefore be on the stable ground when pushing for large consideration of open source software in government institutions.
  • On small scale projects, the open source software is used by government organisations.

 

Kind Regards

Luncedo Ngcofe

 

 

From: Africa [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zoltan Szecsei
Sent: Thursday, 12 September 2019 07:19
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo Africa] Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

 

Hi Gavin/List,
This 'rant' has been around for decades (OK, maybe singular, not plural), yet it has always been in the form of an open rant, and not a direction.

As a community we have always championed user groups etc, with a handful of people making the effort, and everyone benefiting.
This is the norm, and I see it no different (in manpower effort and 'split') from energy required for past endeavors. (So no-one should be scared of getting involved).

I would like to suggest a way forward.
But this is strictly about getting Open Source to have a fair look-in, and not about the specifics of any tender or purchase.
My support is for leveling the playing field, and for exposing/wiping out badly constructed Bid specifications.

If my suggestion is bad/useless/whatever, I hope at least it does cause some debate that might turn into direction.

So,
Perhaps you could do some initial research, maybe applicable laws or policy guidance documents.
Perhaps listers working in government can point to some relevant documents on this matter.

Then find some legal-minded person to cost out a strategy, and of course make a 'feasibility of success' statement.
After that, we could have a worthwhile direction.

With a feasible direction we could try some crowd funding - or maybe even just have to make some representation (through SAGI??) to some government body with the power to change things.

I am still playing in the sand out here (Qatar), so cannot offer to help, but providing we have a direction and a crowd funding platform, I will pledge R1000 to further this cause.

Anyone else with some ideas?

Regards,
Zoltan

On 2019/09/11 14:43, Gavin Fleming wrote:

If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives. 
 
This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)
 
Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond: 
 
"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.” 
 
Or Mandeni:
 
"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"
 
SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?
 
Gavin
 
 
 

 

 
 

 

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa

 

-- 
 
=============================================
Zoltan Szecsei GPrGISc 0031
Geograph (Pty) Ltd.
GIS and Photogrammetric Services
 
P.O. Box 7, Muizenberg 7950, South Africa.
 
Mobile: +27-83-6004028
Qatar:  +974 5083 2722     www.geograph.co.za
=============================================

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help prevent DRDLR and other government entities from deviously renewing their ESRI ELAs

Sindile Bidla-2
In reply to this post by gavinf
Maybe as a starting point, Section 217 of the Constitution provides for the following, I quote "When an organ of state in the national, provincial or local sphere of government, or any other institution identified in national legislation, contracts for goods or services, it must do so in accordance with a system which is fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective."
Consequently I think we could do the following:
1. Write to the National Treasury (Chief Procurement Office) and CFO of the Department bringing this to their attention and seeking clarity whether this is inline with Section 217
I also agree that the way the TORs are crafted are done in a way that ensures a particular service provider gets the work for example:
"Unlimited GIS software license distribution for a period of three (3) years including all extensions and add-on software." No other product uses this type of wording
"Service provider must show proof of registration/certification as an authorized enterprise implementation partner of their respective Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)."
"In case the bidder does not meet condition 7.1.1., then the bidder must subcontract to an EME or QSE which is at least 51% owned by black people as per the following estimated total bid values and percentages (Provide proof of subcontracting
arrangement which may include a subcontracting agreement between main tenderer and subcontractor)." Circumventing the pre-qualification criteria as per the new preferential procurement regulations.

Regards,
Sindile Bidla

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 13:45, Gavin Fleming <[hidden email]> wrote:
If you have the time and energy, I invite you to help do something about this thinly veiled attempt at renewing the DRDLR ESRI ELA, when they are expressly not allowed to. They are supposed to go to open tender and consider alternatives and in particular, FOSS alternatives.

This is one of many attempts by government entities to bypass official procurement procedures and simply renew their ESRI ELAs (Same goes for Oracle and other proprietary vendors). Most I’ve come across, like Drakenstein municipality and Ekurhuleni and Joburg Metros, are finding or have found means to do this without even tendering (for example by invoking sole supplier status or abusing the SITA ‘framework agreement’) . In this case DRDLR is going out to tender, but it is hardly open nor fair (just read it!)

Then you get municipalities like Molemole illegally requesting named products in tenders and worse, giving the market minimal time to respond:

"COR 8/1/1/09: Molemole Municipality is hereby inviting quotations from service providers to render a service of supply, delivery, installation and configuration of ArcGIS licenses. Specifications: 1. Level 2 Term License; 5 user Pack; 2. Level 1 Term License; 10 User Pack; 3. Service Credits; 1 Block (1000 Credits); 4. Map (1); Drone 2 Map for ArcGIS Term License. Please note that this quotation was published late.”

Or Mandeni:

"13/19/20: Quotations are hereby invited from suitably service providers to supply and deliver of Software Licenses as per the following specification: • ... • ESRI Software maintenance renewal End User No: 307570"

SAGI, CSI, SITA, GISSA, Practitioners, Competition commission? Why are we allowing this anticompetitive and unaffordable practice to continue, especially in light of the current economic and political climate in SA?

Gavin





_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa

_______________________________________________
Africa mailing list
[hidden email]
You can UNSUBSCRIBE at https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/africa