[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Re: Next Steps: Was Re: Late Bloomer

[Wilkening, Chris]

I, for one, really like the idea of Evergreen becoming more widespread.
One of our greatest challenges here is making the closed-source ILS
systems do what our customers (libraries) want. Sometimes it's just not
possible within the restrictions of the software the library has spent
significant money to purchase. I like the idea of being able to make
changes to the ILS to EXACTLY meet what the library wants and needs so
they can better serve their patrons.

ORIGINAL MESSAGE FOLLOWS:

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:07:09 -0400
From: "Bill Hudson" <bhudson at lancasterlibraries.org>
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Next Steps: Was Re: Late Bloomer
To: <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org>
Message-ID: <003401c78803$d0f07f10$9200a8c0 at lsl.lanco.lib>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"


> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:53:48 -0400
> From: Lynne Welch <welchly at oplin.org>
> Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Late Bloomer
<snip>
> SIRSI Horizon decision. My question to you-all is:  if the librarians 
> got together and prepared a list of must-have's and would-like's, 
> would it be feasible for a group of masters-level students and 
> teachers at either one or several state-funded universities to 
> collaborate on a tweaked version (for example of Evergreen) that would

> work for various sizes of libraries throughout Ohio?
<snip>


Hi Lynne et al,

You've hit on something that has been rolling around in my head for
several weeks now and was given a big kick at the recent Computers In
Libraries
(CIL) conference in DC. Before I go further, a quick introduction. 

I'm the IT manager for a 14 member/16 building library system in south
central PA. We have approximately 750,000 items in the collection and
around
2.8 million circs a year with a service area approaching 500k people.
We've been an Innovative Interfaces' (III) Millennium site since our
migration from Gaylord's Galaxy system back in 2002. 

While I'm generally pleased with the III system, I'm frustrated by 1:
the relatively slow pace of innovation in the system specifically on
behalf of public libraries, 2: the cost of yearly support (I can easily
see in five years that our support cost are within spittn' distance of 6
figures); and 3. the closed nature of the software, i.e. there are very
finite limits as to what we can change, extend, or ways to access our
own data.

At a presentation at CIL, Marshall Breeding expanded on the
technological and financial reasons for the above issues. While I
understand them and sympathize with the challenges faced by the ILS
vendors in a relatively small vertical market, I am certainly willing to
entertain a different way of doing things. From what I've seen,
Evergreen represents the best option to date for medium to large sized
libraries to take control of their ILS systems and advance them at a
pace far greater than the half dozen or so ILS vendors that operate in
this space. It can also be great for smaller libraries but in most
cases, they need the turnkey solution and don't have the time or
expertise to do a lot of "tweaking."

Though I run an IT department, I have no experience in coding or
software development so I plead severe ignorance with regards to the
challenges of developing a large scale software package, let alone one
done as an open source project. Even so, I am being to believe that
PINES has created the nucleus of something that could become a serious
option for many libraries and I am willing to push for broader adoption
and support. 

To that end, I spoke to a member of our own state library group on
Monday about the possibility of that organization getting behind the
Evergreen project. As we all know these organizations move slowly and
need lots of CYA data to make this kind of move, but the curiosity about
my proposal IS there.

As Lynne alluded to with her comment about universities and the talent
pool there, I think there is a tremendous opportunity for us to tap into
this talent as well as the talent in many public libraries across the
world. One only has to look at some of the cool library 2.0 stuff across
the net to see that there are some smart, talented and motivated coders
working in libraryland. Beyond that, with additional dollars from other
entities put towards the project (read states, universities, big
libraries and consortia) you aren't limited to a few core staffers at
PINES and a legion of "volunteer" coders.

So my question to the good folks running the Evergreen project is: do
you have a strategy for developing partnerships outside of your
organization to broaden and deepen the support for Evergreen? Do you
have a plan in place to accommodate a measurable increase in funding
(from potential development
partners) to grow the project?

I'd greatly appreciate some discussion about the long term strategy for
the Evergreen project. With a concrete plan, many of us can use that to
rally others to fund the project and speed development.

I look forward to a vigorus discussion about moving Evergreen from a
state wide initiative to one of national and broader scope.
Thanks,
BH
 
************************************************************************
****

Bill Hudson, Deputy Administrator
Manager, Information Technology Services Library System of Lancaster
County
1866 Colonial Village Lane, Suite 107
Lancaster, PA 17601
V. 717.207.0500 x1269 F.717.207.0504