Skip to content
Today
Sign in

Build2 publishersAlso reported elsewhere3 min readPublished

Prague summit report puts European groups at 15% of open-source governance

Linux Foundation Europe's Thierry Carrez said at the Open Source Summit in Prague that switching to open source alone will not end Europe's dependence. European groups supply 15% of governance participation, The Stack reported, so teams that switch adopt projects governed mostly from outside Europe.

The Engineer · Build desk

How we use AISend a correction

Illustration accompanying Prague summit report puts European groups at 15% of open-source governance
Generated illustration

What happened

  • Only 37% of European groups did any open-source governance work, according to a report released during the Open Source Summit in Prague.
  • CNCF's Jonathan Bryce told a summit panel that access to source code does not give operational sovereignty without the skills to run, secure and monitor systems.
  • Carrez said Europe is short of local companies able to package and support mature open-source projects such as OpenStack.
  • Carrez described proposed cloud and AI assurance levels set per workload, with the top level requiring effective control of the full supply chain, hardware included.

Compiled by The EngineerSomething wrong?How this is made

Why it matters

  • cost Without a local partner the support bill falls on the adopter; Carrez said Societe Generale built its expertise in-house because it lacked one.
  • exposure Under the Cyber Resilience Act, Robinson said, manufacturers carry substantial responsibility for the open-source components they ship, so a switch puts security due diligence on the adopter's own team.
  • decision Teams would have to sort workloads by assurance level under Carrez's proposal; below the top tier, he said, confidential computing can limit a host's access to a workload.
  • contradiction The Stack calls Europe's thin governance role unsustainable, while Bryce argued that broad contributor bases make projects more resilient.

Europe's 15% share of governance participation [2] leaves 85% with groups based elsewhere [26]. The figures as The Stack reported them do not break that 85% down by country. Carrez, general manager of Linux Foundation Europe, gave his own answer on who fills it. "Europe is not necessarily strategically investing in the governance of those open ecosystems, and so from the outside if you look at those ecosystems, they are going to be dominated by companies from the US and from China," he told The Stack [3].

Part of the gap is payroll. Many US and, increasingly, Chinese developers are paid by their employers to contribute to open-source projects, The Stack wrote [5]. In its view, the only way to shape where open source goes is to participate early and often [6]. Carrez said the same thing more bluntly: "If you don't talk to the people that are building the technology that you're using, then it's just another dependency." [4] He also said the EU is making progress in pushing the private sector to do more [7].

Carrez shared a summit panel with CNCF's Jonathan Bryce and Linux Foundation Europe's Paula Grzegorzewska [25]. Their case for switching rested on the ability to leave. "The most valuable thing with open source is the choice," Bryce said [9]. His example was Kubernetes, which can run on an organisation's own infrastructure or on commercial clouds [10]. Grzegorzewska added the condition. An alternative helps only when switching is practical, and moving between proprietary systems can take substantial time and expertise, particularly for governments [11].

Most of the panel's warnings were about operations. Free code can start as an engineering experiment and turn into a critical system that needs sustained support [17]. The French Ministry of Finance went looking for partners after its OpenStack deployment grew beyond its original scope, Carrez said [20]. His prescription was to invest in local service companies, not to rebuild existing global projects [21].

Hardware sits outside both fixes. Bryce said the sovereignty debate he heard around a conference in Shanghai centred on chips and optical systems, because China has long taken part in open-source software [13].

The governance figures back a narrow version of the worry: a European team that switches lands on projects it has little hand in governing [2]. The panel judged sovereignty against an EU cloud sovereignty framework with eight objectives, among them legal, data and AI, operational and supply-chain sovereignty [24]. I think the panel's emphasis on local support is the right one for a team planning a migration now. Governance share decides who steers a project. Support capacity decides whether a European team can keep it running. The panel's joint statement called it naive to believe any region can be 100% sovereign [23].

What to watch

  • Whether the per-workload cloud and AI assurance levels Carrez described are adopted, and which workloads are placed in the top tier that counts hardware.
  • Whether a follow-up to the summit report splits the non-European 85% of governance participation by country, which would test Carrez's claim about US and Chinese dominance.
  • Whether local firms emerge to support OpenStack for public buyers such as the French Ministry of Finance.

Clarity's read

What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.

Reality

Evidence45
Adoption
Insufficient
Hype gap+15
Incentives55
Confidence50
Why these scores

Claim ledger

Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.

  1. [1]

    According to a report released during the Open Source Summit in Prague, only 37% of European groups contributed to open-source governance work.

    ReportedSupportedSource: Report released during the event, as described by The StackView cited source
  2. [2]

    European groups made up just 15% of overall open-source governance participation, according to the report released during the summit.

    ReportedSupportedSource: Report released during the event, as described by The StackView cited source
  3. [3]

    "Europe is not necessarily strategically investing in the governance of those open ecosystems, and so from the outside if you look at those ecosystems, they are going to be dominated by companies from the US and from China,"

    ReportedSupportedSource: Thierry Carrez, general manager, Linux Foundation Europe, interview with The Stack at the Open Source SummitView cited source

Sources

2 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.

  1. infoq.com

    1 article · October 8, 2026

    Technological Sovereignty Requires Choice, Skills, and Support, Panelists Say During OSS EU
  2. thestack.technology

    1 article · October 8, 2026

    Runtime: Open source isn't Europe's sovereign computing answer — yet

Share your take

Let Clarity write the post for you.

Signed-in readers get a short post drafted on this story in the register they choose — narrative, analytical, or a direct position — editable to the last word before it goes anywhere. The share buttons at the top of this story work without an account.

Create a free account to composeSign in

Topics and entities

Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.

Topics

Entities

Loading related stories