New projects with new companies is easy. The problem is open source isn't a requirement for old projects, retroactively adding it is hard.
The companies hired would need to be new companies to contacting, with higher costs. Don't forget, government contracts are a lowest bidder war. Going full open source immediately might expose code that built using proprietary technology from a different division of a company. Therefore open source from scratch will have a high startup cost.
The existing projects can be small, open source, but more importantly these projects begin to build a foundation others can build on. The library of code created to support the framework of these projects will eventually be used as the basis for larger projects.
Wrapping back to the 80% this allows the existing, proprietary code reuse. While new, it's useless without its is proprietary components. This code, if released with proprietary components (and that's a big if since the binary would then be openly distributed) may not qualify as open source. One step further, public free binaries can be reverse engineered (the legality of which isn't something I'm well versed in). Which may not be in a companies current best long-term interest.
Tldr; The largest effort to being 100% open source is the library of code built on must also be open source or commonly distributed. Starting at 0 the current goal is 20%.
Provide costs don't rise too much expect 30% within 2 to 3 years (I'm being optimistic) or the next major government project timeline.
The companies hired would need to be new companies to contacting, with higher costs. Don't forget, government contracts are a lowest bidder war. Going full open source immediately might expose code that built using proprietary technology from a different division of a company. Therefore open source from scratch will have a high startup cost.
The existing projects can be small, open source, but more importantly these projects begin to build a foundation others can build on. The library of code created to support the framework of these projects will eventually be used as the basis for larger projects.
Wrapping back to the 80% this allows the existing, proprietary code reuse. While new, it's useless without its is proprietary components. This code, if released with proprietary components (and that's a big if since the binary would then be openly distributed) may not qualify as open source. One step further, public free binaries can be reverse engineered (the legality of which isn't something I'm well versed in). Which may not be in a companies current best long-term interest.
Tldr; The largest effort to being 100% open source is the library of code built on must also be open source or commonly distributed. Starting at 0 the current goal is 20%.
Provide costs don't rise too much expect 30% within 2 to 3 years (I'm being optimistic) or the next major government project timeline.