[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen web page for paid support vendors

[Rogan Hamby]

I'm more in favor of high lighting active and proven community members than
vetting some and searching for any kind of misrepresentation.

I think there is a big difference in the models in terms of labor for the
web team and how it frames their relationship to the community.


On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Mike Rylander <mrylander at gmail.com> wrote:

> While I am personally an active community member, I'm also an employee
> of a service provider, so unless I see something that seems
> particularly antagonistic toward service providers I'll stay out of
> most of this discussion except to say this: in my opinion, the purpose
> of the page is not well served if there is not at least some
> demonstration of competency for the specific services or products
> offered by a vendor or service provider.  I don't know what sort of
> vetting should take place, and I realize that there is a burden
> involved to fearless our volunteers, but I'm of the opinion that a
> blanket "caveat emptor" is enough to help those looking for Evergreen
> services if there are, in fact, inaccurate offerings listed.  I wish I
> had a solution, or even a suggestion, but I'm not sure I'm the one to
> be offering such in this particular case.  That said, if others feel
> my input would be valuable I'm happy to speak publicly or privately
> about possible solutions to any real or perceived problems.
>
> However, on a more positive note, I'd like to address Kathy's question
> about third-party services and vendors.  I believe that the "vendor
> page" could be used to good effect to reward (or, perhaps, highlight)
> those third party vendors that are active contributors to the project.
>  Those that sponsor or implement specific, measurable feature
> improvements in Evergreen don't fall into the "support vendor"
> category, but go beyond "our stuff works with Evergreen because we
> followed standard X."  Vendors of that type don't currently have much
> representation or exposure, but they are important.  I'll give a
> couple examples (of which there are quite a few more, actually) to
> help clarify:
>
>  * EBSCO sent a developer to the 2012 hackfest with the expressed
> purpose of implementing NoveList Select functionality in Evergreen,
> and they wanted to do that so they could make sure Evergreen will
> continue to be able to integrate their content. (They partially
> sponsored the event, too, but that's a different thing.)
>  * PV-SUPA sponsored development to integrate their RFID hardware with
> the Evergreen staff client, and enthusiastically agreed to have it
> developed in such a way as to allow other 3rd party products to
> integrate in a similar way by paying to have a plugin framework built,
> instead of pushing for a special-case integration just for them.
>
> Recognizing 3rd party contributors of this sort, along side direct
> service providers, would provide incentive for future and broader
> collaboration and contribution, and highlight those external products
> and services that have both (actual) external and community backing.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --miker
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > At the June Oversight Board meeting (minutes available at
> >
> http://evergreen-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=governance:minutes:2013-6-20
> ),
> > I raised the question of whether the Evergreen community should develop a
> > policy regarding the paid support vendors that are listed on the
> Evergreen
> > web site at
> > http://evergreen-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=faqs:evergreen_companies.
> >
> > I don't think the community should be in a position of endorsing any
> > Evergreen provider. However, I think it's important that the companies on
> > the list do indeed provide Evergreen services so that users don't waste a
> > lot of time investigating companies that don't really work with
> Evergreen.
> > There was a consensus at the Board meeting that a policy should be
> > considered.
> >
> > I would like to get feedback from others in the community on the
> guidelines
> > you think should be used for this page. As an example, Koha asks support
> > providers to follow the procedures outlined at
> > http://koha-community.org/support/paid-support/how-to-get-listed/. The
> Koha
> > community asks support providers to send an e-mail to the general list
> with
> > contact information and a description of services provided. The providers
> > must also show their support for the community by adding a visible link
> to
> > the Koha web site.
> >
> > I think the Koha guidelines might offer a good starting point for the
> > Evergreen community.
> >
> > During the meeting, there was discussion about whether we should define
> what
> > an Evergreen service is. Migration, hosting, support, development,
> training,
> > and implementation seem like obvious Evergreen services. Should
> peripheral
> > devices or third-party services that work with Evergreen be included or
> are
> > they a different animal?
> >
> > Does everyone like the Koha model of requiring listed vendors to add a
> > visible link to the project web site?
> >
> > Does anyone have any other thoughts on the subject?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Kathy
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kathy Lussier
> > Project Coordinator
> > Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
> > (508) 343-0128
> > klussier at masslnc.org
> > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Rylander
>  | Director of Research and Development
>  | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
>  | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
>  | email:  miker at esilibrary.com
>  | web:  http://www.esilibrary.com
>



-- 

Rogan Hamby, MLS, CCNP, MIA
Managers Headquarters Library and Reference Services,
York County Library System

"You can never get a cup of tea large enough or a book long enough to suit
me."
-- C.S. Lewis <http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1069006.C_S_Lewis>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20130710/eac44051/attachment.htm>