blog: 영문판이 없던 블로그 8편 번역

content/en/blog/2021/20210115-opensource-license-used-by-it-companies/index.md

@@ -26,4 +26,56 @@ Measures the contributions of members of a commercial organization using publicl
 According to the analysis score, Google is at the forefront, with Microsoft and Red Hat coming next. Samsung is ranked 29th for Korean companies and LG Electronics is ranked 71st. 
 
 ## License Status used by Major Companies
-See [Open Source License Usage Survey](https://solutionshub.epam.com/blog/post/examining-open-source-license-usage)
+The [Open Source License Usage Survey](https://solutionshub.epam.com/blog/post/examining-open-source-license-usage), drawn from data collected through OSCI, is also worth a look. Measurement was already possible with tools like Google BigQuery, but the results were unreliable because abuse and other invalid data weren't filtered out. Building OSCI made it possible to compile statistics over a set of meaningful GitHub repositories, which makes this data more useful.
+
+The study examined the license choices of new public repositories created on GitHub from early 2018 through mid-2020, and also studied a year of data from GitLab to compare patterns across popular open source hosting platforms.
+
+### The Sharp Rise in New GitHub Repositories
+![github-repository](github-repository.png)
+
+It shows that the number of repositories created on GitHub has grown sharply over the past two and a half years. This growth in open source is a trend that deserves particular attention.
+
+
+### License Usage Trends Since 2018
+Looking at repositories created from early 2018, several trends stand out.
+
+- 34% of repositories do not include a license file, which puts their open source status in question.
+- 21% of repositories are not recognized by GitHub as a standard license type. This is usually because the license file contains custom license text, often just a minor edit of standard license text. Finally, and most importantly, Apache 2.0 and MIT are the two most widely used license types, together accounting for more than 35% of all repositories.
+
+![license-usage](license-usage.png)
+
+Excluding repositories without a license file, more than half use the Apache 2.0 or MIT license. A third of repositories use some form of custom license text, and the remaining 13% cover a range of licenses, most commonly variants of BSD and the GNU Public License.
+![license-usage-exclude-no-license](license-usage-exclude-no-license.png)
+
+Repositories continue to be created without a license file despite GitHub's guidance. The data suggests that many individual contributors do not understand the importance of including a license file in an open source project.
+
+
+### License Usage at the Top 5 OSCI-Ranked Companies
+The chart for commercial organizations looks different from the one covering all repositories analyzed on GitHub. Apache 2.0 is by far the most widely used license, followed by custom license text. The MIT license is the only other standard license to gain significant adoption. **Copyleft licenses are barely used.** Finally, a non-trivial number of repositories still have no license file; a manual review of a sample found that most of these are not code repositories at all, but examples or documentation.
+![license-usage-top5](license-usage-top5.png)
+
+Looking at each of the top 5 companies individually, the results are interesting, and preferences differ from company to company.
+
+![license-used-by-company](license-used-by-company.png)
+
+
+Apache is the most preferred license at Google, IBM, and Red Hat. At Microsoft, most licenses are custom text, with MIT as the next most preferred standard license type. A manual review of some of that custom license text found that it was often actually MIT (for code repositories) or Creative Commons (for documentation).
+
+Intel, by contrast, appears to use a much wider variety of license types, with Apache the most preferred, followed by custom license text and 3-Clause BSD. A manual study of the custom license text in Intel's repositories shows it to be a mix based on Apache 2.0, 3-Clause BSD, and other standard license types.
+
+
+### GitLab Analysis
+Over the 12 months from Q2 2019 through the end of Q1 2020, a pattern emerged that is very different from the GitHub results. In particular, 77.7% of public repositories created in this period have no license file. This again suggests that developers are not aware of the need for, or value of, choosing an open source license. It may also reflect some difference between the users who create open source projects on GitLab and on GitHub, with more individual use relative to commercial use.
+
+![gitlab-license-usage](gitlab-license-usage.png)
+
+Excluding repositories without a license file, the image below shows MIT as the most popular at 37%, followed by custom license text at 21%, GPL 3.0 at 17%, and Apache 2.0 at 10%. In summary, permissive license types are again the most widely used on GitLab, but MIT leads, and Apache 2.0 usage is much lower than on GitHub. Copyleft licenses hold a similarly small share on both GitLab and GitHub.
+
+![gitlab-license-excluded-no-license](gitlab-license-excluded-no-license.png)
+
+## Conclusion
+This study surfaces a number of interesting findings.
+- Apache 2.0 and MIT are the clear leaders, and the trend toward permissive license types is growing.
+  Copyleft license types see only modest use.
+- The number of repositories created without a license is growing, which suggests that individual developers in particular may not understand the legal aspects of open source.
+- Custom license types are especially widespread among commercial organizations, and in most cases appear to be based on standard license types.

content/en/blog/2021/20211123-nipa-opensource-guide/index.md

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+---
+date: 2021-11-23
+title: "NIPA Publishes Four Guides for Using Open Source Software"
+linkTitle: "NIPA Open Source Guides"
+description: "The National IT Industry Promotion Agency (NIPA) has published four 'NIPA Open Source Software Guides' to help enterprises, institutions, and organizations use open source software safely."
+author: Robin Hwang ([@revfactory](https://github.com/revfactory))
+categories: ["blog"]
+tags: ["NIPA", "Training Material"]
+resources:
+- src: "**.{png,jpg}"
+  title: "Image #:counter"
+  params:
+    byline: "Photo: Robin Hwang"
+---
+
+NIPA has published four guides for using open source software. (Source: https://www.oss.kr/news/show/ef0900db-f5b4-40fb-8745-f1b937fbd8d0)
+
+The four open source software guides cover the following.
+The Corporate Open Source Software Governance Guide was co-authored by current OpenChain KWG steering committee members Haksung Jang, Seoyeon Lee, and Minho Hwang.
+
+## Open Source Software License Guide (Revised Edition)
+[Download the Open Source Software License Guide](https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/a17c94f3-a470-4e1d-8cfe-d5d15d6535f7)
+
+Covers an overview and introduction to open source software licenses, how to comply with license obligations, copyright and patent considerations, license-related checklists, management approaches, notable dispute cases, and frequently asked questions, organized so the core content applicable to a company or organization can be identified and used across a range of situations.
+
+The Open Source Software License Guide gives developers and managers at companies and organizations an easier way to understand the general concepts and key compliance requirements of open source licenses, and provides guidance on the matters they need to review to apply that understanding in practice. It is organized into: open source software concepts and definitions; open source license concepts and obligations; copyright and patent issues in open source software; open source license compatibility and dual licensing; open source license checklists by distribution method; open source license management; open source license dispute cases; and support available for open source license matters. Because the obligations a user must review and apply differ depending on the license, the mode of use, and the distribution method even when using the same open source software, this guide also offers separate tips for each section to help readers identify the content that matters most for their own company or organization and apply it across different situations.
+
+<a href="https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/a17c94f3-a470-4e1d-8cfe-d5d15d6535f7" target="_blank">
+<img src="opensource-sw-license-guide.jpg" data-canonical-src="opensource-sw-license-guide.jpg" width="300px" height="600px" />
+</a>
+
+## Public Sector Open Source Software Governance Guide
+[Download the Public Sector Open Source Software Governance Guide](https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/824f56c5-8ed7-40cc-84d1-a03fa2f42bb1)
+
+Provides the relevant laws and guidelines, and the considerations and checkpoints to review, at each stage of a public-sector IT project when using open source software: planning, plan development, vendor selection and contracting, project execution, inspection and operation, and performance evaluation.
+
+The Public Sector Open Source Software Governance Guide reflects an analysis of domestic and international open source policy and technology trends, and provides the laws and guidelines that must be checked, along with practical information and approaches, for using and managing open source software when carrying out an IT project in the domestic public sector. Each chapter covers the need for open source software management in IT projects and how to manage open source software in IT projects. The section on the need for management introduces the open source policies and use cases of governments at home and abroad, organizes the relevant laws, guidelines, and commentaries for IT projects, and explains the provisions relevant to open source software management. The section on managing open source software in IT projects introduces a basic management and review process for each stage — planning, plan development, vendor selection and contracting, project execution, inspection and operation, and performance evaluation — provides a list of guidelines and commentaries practitioners can reference at each stage, and offers management factors and review items for checking open source software management.
+
+<a href="https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/824f56c5-8ed7-40cc-84d1-a03fa2f42bb1" target="_blank">
+<img src="opensource-sw-governance-guide.jpg" data-canonical-src="opensource-sw-governance-guide.jpg" width="300px" height="600px" />
+</a>
+
+## Corporate Open Source Software Governance Guide
+[Download the Corporate Open Source Software Governance Guide](https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/2f7c25e8-df31-4ad9-9d25-1d8234c322c0)
+
+Explains three cases of using open source software in enterprise software development and delivery — use, contribution, and release — in a way practitioners can apply directly, and closes with guidance on the organizational structure a company needs for open source software governance.
+
+As companies increasingly develop and release software products and services built on open source software, the Corporate Open Source Software Governance Guide provides the guidance needed to establish open source software governance — covering source code management and supply policy, compliance processes, management tools, and organizational structure — as well as how a company can contribute to and release into the community. Each chapter covers using open source software, contributing to open source software, releasing open source software, and the OSPO (Open Source Program Office). Each topic is explained separately from the perspective of the company and of the developer to aid understanding. The company section focuses on what an open source software manager needs to know to establish policy and process, while the developer section explains what a developer at a company needs to use open source software.
+
+<a href="https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/2f7c25e8-df31-4ad9-9d25-1d8234c322c0" target="_blank">
+<img src="featured-opensource-sw-company-guide.jpg" data-canonical-src="featured-opensource-sw-company-guide.jpg" width="300px" height="600px" />
+</a>
+
+## Open OS Adoption Guide
+[Download the Open OS Adoption Guide](https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/0e9ad67e-9d2a-4a0a-8f2d-092226e3ea07)
+
+Introduces open operating systems for transitioning office PCs, their types, the adoption process and scope, ongoing maintenance, and case studies, giving practitioners a guide to the overall project plan when considering adoption of an open OS.
+
+The Open OS Adoption Guide addresses the policy of expanding open OS adoption, a topic under active discussion domestically as part of open source software policy, and helps institutions considering adoption understand open operating systems, drawing on real adoption cases to make the guide useful throughout the review and implementation process. Each chapter covers an overview of open OS; open OS adoption case studies; matters to review before adopting an open OS; the project procurement process for adopting an open OS; the open OS maintenance process; and how to use this guide. Drawing on a range of reference models and cases for open OS adoption, it offers guidance on the overall project plan and the procedures and considerations practitioners need when reviewing adoption of an open OS.
+
+<a href="https://www.oss.kr/oss_guide/show/0e9ad67e-9d2a-4a0a-8f2d-092226e3ea07" target="_blank">
+<img src="opensource-sw-openos-guide.jpg" data-canonical-src="opensource-sw-openos-guide.jpg" width="300px" height="600px" />
+</a>
+
+
+
+---------