[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] generic training server with predictable data CLARIFICATION

[Lori Bowen Ayre]

Just a point of clarification about what I meant by the KCLS version of
Evergreen....what I'm talking about is Evergreen.  Period.  It is not a
variation at all.  All the work that is being done at KCLS/Equinox is part
of the single version of Evergreen we all share.  However, not all of the
development has been rolled into an official release (although it is
available in trunk).  Our thinking is that some people can't easily download
a copy from trunk but would love to grab a client and jump in to see what
KCLS is working on.  So, we are planning to keep a copy of the KCLS
development server available for others to log into for just that purpose.

Lots of the work that has been funded by KCLS is already available and we
are all benefiting from that.  And all the rest will be there soon.  But I
do know some people are trying to put together their own development
projects so it would be useful to see what's cooking on the KCLS development
server too.

And just to further clarify, we (KCLS Team) are currently working on getting
generic versions of the OPAC templates they've developed ready.  Turns out
there is an added expense to genericize them so we are just now exploring
options for making that happen.

In other words, all the KCLS work is being shared with the community one way
or another.


On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Lori Bowen Ayre <lori.ayre at galecia.com>wrote:

> Hi Dan and Don and anyone else interested in a training server.  As part of
> my work on the IMLS grant (RSCEL and KCLS), we are working on setting up two
> things.  One,.a demo server of the KCLS version of Evergreen so people can
> get a sneak peek.  And two, a training server which we'd refresh daily with
> a reliable set of data.  I'm writing now to ask those of you who offered up
> some data to please send it along now so we can put some data in our
> instance of Evergreen.  We aren't yet ready for prime-time but we're getting
> close on both counts.
>
> If you have data we could use for a public training server (e.g. no real
> patron or real library data please), could you get in touch with Brian
> Feifarek (copied on this message).  He's our point man on this aspect of our
> work.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Lori Ayre
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Dan Scott <dan at coffeecode.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Don:
>>
>> On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 08:23 -0400, Don Butterworth wrote:
>> > Hello everyone,
>> >
>> > My name is Don Butterworth. I am the Head of Technical Services at
>> > Asbury Theological Seminary and have been lurking on this list for the
>> > last couple of months. Late last year our library migrated from
>> > Horizon to Symphony. After having worked with the cataloging and
>> > acquisitions modules for over six months, it is my personal opinion
>> > that our department's efficiency has been reduced by at least 20%.
>> > Because of that, if I can convince the "powers that be," I hope to set
>> > up an Evergreen test database here on campus, so that we can get a
>> > feel for the software, workflow, and level of IT involvement. Then,
>> > when the Acquisitions module is released in 2.0, thoroughly test it to
>> > see if it is a viable alternative to Symphony.
>> >
>> > I have files of OCLC MARC records, for all of last year's
>> > acquisitions, which I plan to import as our test database; about
>> > 10,000 records. If it is legal, I believe I can convince our
>> > administration to contribute them to an RSCEL training server, if that
>> > would be helpful.
>>
>> I think that would be helpful, but as I'm not a lawyer, I'm not going to
>> venture an opinion as to whether it would be legal for you to share OCLC
>> MARC records; you might want to seek independent legal advice on that.
>>
>> I will note that the Evergreen source code already includes sets of MARC
>> records of varying types in the Open-ILS/tests/datasets directory (see
>>
>> http://svn.open-ils.org/trac/ILS/browser/trunk/Open-ILS/tests/datasets/READMEfor a description of those sets). In some cases the leader doesn't correctly
>> identify the encoding of the records, others have similar problems that
>> reflect the problems that we'll run into with other real-life records. I
>> would be happy to add more records to those datasets and use those as the
>> basis of a canonical set of predictable data, as long as contributors sign
>> off on their right to contribute records.
>>
>> I think Simon Spero was collecting a set of torture-test MARC records;
>> those might be useful for testing purposes as well.
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20100826/c3026384/attachment.htm