All,
I'm reposting this here since this discussion is taking
place
simultaneously on the two lists I posted this announcement
on - web4lib
and code4lib. Which to me brings up a paradox in the line
of reasoning
I am hearing. If there is some aversion to having a second
list for
open source in libraries, why is there a separate list for
code4lib and
also web4lib? Code4lib addresses this on it's description
page by
narrowing the focus to primarily programming, while leaving
it open for
discussions of the type that happen as well on web4lib.
Forgive me; perhaps it's the Philosophy major in me. I guess
I just
don't understand the questioning of "having another
list" for OSS.
Just because there is already one out there doesn't mean
that another
can't be started. That seems akin to saying, "Well, we
have Evergreen,
what would we need Koha for?" Or, "Wired writes
technology news and
blogs, why would someone need CNET news and blogs?".
A comprehensive list of lists would be great, but even if
there is a
central location, that shouldn't prevent folks who don't
like the
format or interface, who want to change the focus or
audience, or who
don't know about the list, from starting their own or
require that they
ask the other group before starting it. I just find it
ironic that a
discussion of an open source website, focusing on a topic
which at it's
core is about freedom of choice and developing alternatives,
is leading
to a discussion of how a central list would possibly prevent
duplication. This isn't like a split in a development tree,
but merely
making available another information access point.
But then again, we ARE librarians - we organize information
for a
living. I came close to listmania last week when I started
going over
all the lists I keep: music, books, movies I own, concerts
I've been to,
books I've read, things I take with me on vacation, etc.
Yeah, I'm a bit
anal retentive sometimes. C'est la
vie
Chadwick
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All,
I'm glad to see some positive responses to this new effort.
I know that
Jeff Humphrey knew about oss4lib prior to beginning this and
that he has
opened lines of communication with Dan since this discussion
started.
Thank you all for your support and encouragement as this new
venture begins.
I am a member of a consortium task force that has been
evaluating all
sorts of PAC enhancements/front ends, ILS's, and more. Our
consortium
is interested in what is happening with OSS in and for
libraries, but
are cautious adopters. I continue to notice that many
Directors,
front-line librarians, and even systems librarians are
unfamiliar with
some of the ramifications and considerations that should be
kept in mind
when reviewing FLOSS for implementation. I see lots of
interest, but
the level of understanding is still low. It's up to us as
IT
professionals (who happen to also be librarians) to help
make this
transition easy for them if we expect them to seriously
consider using
OSS tools and apps for library purposes.
The standard disconnect between technologists and users
continues to be
an obstacle that must be overcome. It's funny because I sent
Dan's
article from CIL titled "What Libraries Still Don't
Know about Open
Source" to several of our lists on Tuesday. Our members
need executive
summaries like KGS writes and introductions like Dan's to
help break the
ice. I'm still trying to find a locally hosted wiki package
that has an
easy to use interface so the front-line librarians don't
balk the first
time they try to use the syntax.
My place of work has used OSS from the beginning and we use
it almost
exclusively if we have a choice. However, the folks we
support are just
*users* and they most often don't have the programming and
coding skills
to modify what they need to make it work locally. But WE
do, and that's
our job. I think coders and programmers often can be
intimidating to
converse with. Anyone who has joined an established
developers forum
will know to what I am referring. The "thread
nazi's" on forums make it
hard for n00bs to jump in without getting squashed. I'm not
making any
comparisons or allusions here, just talking about the
general esoteric
nature of programming and coding communities.
For the lone systems librarian at small institutions with a
beginner or
intermediate skill level in programming, a different level
of discussion
will be necessary. I also think the average, non-techie
librarian would
be more likely to participate in a group where others were
at that
level. I haven't participated on oss4lib, so I can't speak
to that.
Please don't read more into this than what I am stating.
OSS is not a panacea and comes with it's own set of
draw-backs and bugs.
No single software product is perfect, but the freedom to
make it your
own, IF you have the skills, knowledge, time, money, and
staff, is
incremental to helping libraries transition from a total
dependence on
vendor development for our products. I am happy that
Liblime is taking
the approach that they have thus far to help libraries
transition into
this model. Paying for service rather than the product.
I suppose my point is that catering to various levels of
users seeking
information is a good thing and in keeping with the
democratic
principles the movement is founded on. I feel that two
sites will
likely complement each other. If there is a need being met
it will
succeed. If not it will fade away. Such is the way of the
net and
technology in general.
--
*Chadwick J. Seagraves M.S.L.S
Library Systems Analyst
Private Academic Library Network of Indiana
Indiana Cooperative Library Services Authority
(317) 298-6570 ext. 116 or (800)-733-1899
6202 Morenci Trail
Indianapolis, IN 46268
palni.edu <http://www.palni.edu>
InfoSciPhi.info <http://www.infosciphi.
info>
--
*Chadwick J. Seagraves M.S.L.S
Library Systems Analyst
Private Academic Library Network of Indiana
Indiana Cooperative Library Services Authority
(317) 298-6570 ext. 116 or (800)-733-1899
6202 Morenci Trail
Indianapolis, IN 46268
palni.edu <http://www.palni.edu>
InfoSciPhi.info <http://www.infosciphi.
info>
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4libwebjunction.org
http://lists.we
bjunction.org/web4lib/
C'est la
vie
Chadwick
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All,
I'm glad to see some positive responses to this new effort.
I know that
Jeff Humphrey knew about oss4lib prior to beginning this and
that he has
opened lines of communication with Dan since this discussion
started.
Thank you all for your support and encouragement as this new
venture begins.
I am a member of a consortium task force that has been
evaluating all
sorts of PAC enhancements/front ends, ILS's, and more. Our
consortium
is interested in what is happening with OSS in and for
libraries, but
are cautious adopters. I continue to notice that many
Directors,
front-line librarians, and even systems librarians are
unfamiliar with
some of the ramifications and considerations that should be
kept in mind
when reviewing FLOSS for implementation. I see lots of
interest, but
the level of understanding is still low. It's up to us as
IT
professionals (who happen to also be librarians) to help
make this
transition easy for them if we expect them to seriously
consider using
OSS tools and apps for library purposes.
The standard disconnect between technologists and users
continues to be
an obstacle that must be overcome. It's funny because I sent
Dan's
article from CIL titled "What Libraries Still Don't
Know about Open
Source" to several of our lists on Tuesday. Our members
need executive
summaries like KGS writes and introductions like Dan's to
help break the
ice. I'm still trying to find a locally hosted wiki package
that has an
easy to use interface so the front-line librarians don't
balk the first
time they try to use the syntax.
My place of work has used OSS from the beginning and we use
it almost
exclusively if we have a choice. However, the folks we
support are just
*users* and they most often don't have the programming and
coding skills
to modify what they need to make it work locally. But WE
do, and that's
our job. I think coders and programmers often can be
intimidating to
converse with. Anyone who has joined an established
developers forum
will know to what I am referring. The "thread
nazi's" on forums make it
hard for n00bs to jump in without getting squashed. I'm not
making any
comparisons or allusions here, just talking about the
general esoteric
nature of programming and coding communities.
For the lone systems librarian at small institutions with a
beginner or
intermediate skill level in programming, a different level
of discussion
will be necessary. I also think the average, non-techie
librarian would
be more likely to participate in a group where others were
at that
level. I haven't participated on oss4lib, so I can't speak
to that.
Please don't read more into this than what I am stating.
OSS is not a panacea and comes with it's own set of
draw-backs and bugs.
No single software product is perfect, but the freedom to
make it your
own, IF you have the skills, knowledge, time, money, and
staff, is
incremental to helping libraries transition from a total
dependence on
vendor development for our products. I am happy that
Liblime is taking
the approach that they have thus far to help libraries
transition into
this model. Paying for service rather than the product.
I suppose my point is that catering to various levels of
users seeking
information is a good thing and in keeping with the
democratic
principles the movement is founded on. I feel that two
sites will
likely complement each other. If there is a need being met
it will
succeed. If not it will fade away. Such is the way of the
net and
technology in general.
--
*Chadwick J. Seagraves
M.S.L.S
Library Systems Analyst
Private Academic Library Network of Indiana
Indiana Cooperative Library Services Authority
(317) 298-6570 ext. 116 or (800)-733-1899
6202 Morenci Trail
Indianapolis, IN 46268
palni.edu <
webjunction.org