[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions Interest Group meeting minutes & request for dedicated Acquisitions Listserv

Thu Apr 27 10:58:58 EDT 2017

This is not the first time the group has discussed or requested a separate
mailing list.This keeps coming up because when the group meets there is
indication that if we had the list more users would become more vocal,
which is really something we need to facilitate.   I've noticed that most
of the no's are coming from people who aren't acquisitions users.  Why
can't we at least try it out? If we need guidelines to surround this
process, fine, but let's make them so they allow the possibility.
Thanks for listening,
my 2 cents,
Leslie

Leslie St. John
*PINES Services Specialist*
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Suite 150
Atlanta, GA 30345-4304
404-235-7129 tel
404.235.7201 fax
www.georgialibraries.org
www.gapines.org

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm just catching up to this email thread now. I also saw that there was a
> similar request for a circulation list that was briefly discussed in IRC
> last week.
>
> There seems to be two schools of thought in the community about mailing
> lists. There are a lot of people who would like to see most of the
> discussions happening on just one or two lists so that nobody is missing
> out on information that may be important to them. The volume of discussion
> in the community is certainly small enough to support the idea of using
> just one or two lists for all of our communication.
>
> We also have people who prefer to communicate on topical lists that
> pertain to their area of focus.
>
> I'm one of those people who would prefer that all Evergreen discussions
> happen on the general list, but I'm also a person who feels comfortable
> posting to the general list. When the catalogers list was created a few
> years ago, I noticed a couple of people posting to the list who I had
> previously rarely seen posting on the general list. I think that's one
> value to creating these topical lists. No matter how much we tell people
> they should feel comfortable posting on any Evergreen-related topic to the
> general list, there will always be people who feel a little intimidated
> about posting to a list the goes out to the entire Evergreen community. If
> a new list gets more people comfortable with participating in the
> community, I consider it a win.
>
> Although I also sometimes hear concerns that talking too much on a given
> topic might clog up another list, I've ever heard anyone complain about
> this issue. It would be good to know if there are people who do indeed
> think there is too much traffic coming from their Evergreen list
> discussions, but I personally find the volume very low.
>
> Another factor to consider is that topical lists might give people a
> feeling that there is a place for them in the community. Since we have
> already created lists for reports and cataloging, I can see why community
> members might hope there is a similar communication platform for other
> topical areas.
>
> What we seem to be lacking is any kind of process for requesting new lists
> or guidelines about when a new list is warranted. With no process, my
> concern is that this request and the circ request will just die with no
> definitive answer. A clear 'no' answer with reasons why the list will not
> be created is better than no answer at all.
>
> I've looked around and found a couple of other communities that have some
> kind of language around new lists.
>
> Debian - https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/HOWTO_start_list (very vague)
> One Laptop Per Child - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/
> Mailing_lists#Starting_a_new_list
>
> If you all think this is a good idea, I would be willing to work on coming
> up with some guidelines. Also, let me know if you are interested in helping
> out.
>
> Kathy
>
>
>
>
> On 04/21/2017 09:37 AM, Rogan Hamby wrote:
>
> My concern would be that we have already seen other lists (such as the
> Sysadmin one) suffer from splintering as Jason pointed out.  People may not
> sign up for a new list serv and less eyes on communication ends up being a
> detriment.
>
> The cataloging list for example I don't think is suffering from such a
> volume of messages that adding to it will create too many noise points or
> disrupt it's existing communication.  So far in the whole of 2017 to date
> (109 days) we have had 23 messages on the cataloging list, so a frequency
> of just over one every five days.  I think there's plenty of room in there
> for focus to happen :)
>
> And I will also echo Jason's point about development input should happen
> on the development list where possible.  The dev list is not a secret club
> for coders but for development.  Sometimes the lines blur and discussion of
> features, bugs, etc... happens across lists (which is healthy) but when
> things are clearly about specific development I don't see how splintering
> the communication away from the people who file bugs, test bugs, write
> patches, etc... benefits it.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rogan Hamby
>
> Data and Project Analyst
>
> Equinox Open Library Initiative
>
> phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
>
> email:  rogan at EquinoxInitiative.org
> web:  http://EquinoxInitiative.org
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Tiffany Little <
> tlittle at georgialibraries.org> wrote:
>
>> My vote would be "yes" for having a specific listserv for Acquisitions.
>> It would let the discussions be more Acq-specific instead of clogging up
>> the Catalogers' list with stuff they might not care about, and could be a
>> more focused discussion since it wouldn't be mixed in with other areas of
>> interest.
>>
>> Tiffany
>>
>> --
>> Tiffany Little
>> *PINES Services Specialist, Acquisitions*
>> Georgia Public Library Service
>> 1800 Century Place, Suite 150
>> Atlanta, Georgia 30345
>> (404) 235-7160
>> <tlittle at georgialibraries.org>tlittle at georgialibraries.org
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Jason Stephenson < <jason at sigio.com>
>> jason at sigio.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd argue for "No" on the creation of an acquisitions list. Mainly for
>>> the same reasons that the administrators' list was shut down and that I
>>> disagree with the creation of a circulation list.
>>>
>>> I think the discussion of Angularization of acquisitions interfaces
>>> belongs on the development list and not on the catalogers, general, or a
>>> new list. If you want to discuss how the interface looks and works,
>>> you're a developer whether or not you write code, like it or not.
>>>
>>> Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary, etc.
>>>
>>> On 04/21/2017 08:27 AM, Elaine Hardy wrote:
>>> > Christine,
>>> >
>>> > Works for me....
>>> >
>>> > Elaine
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > J. Elaine Hardy
>>> > PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
>>> > Georgia Public Library Service/PINES
>>> > 1800 Century Place, Ste. 150
>>> > Atlanta, GA 30045
>>> >
>>> > 404.235.7128 Office
>>> > 404.548.4241 Cell
>>> > 404.235.7201 FAX
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Christine Burns
>>> > <christine.burns at bc.libraries.coop
>>> > <mailto: <christine.burns at bc.libraries.coop>christine.burns at bc.lib
>>> raries.coop>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >     Hello
>>> >
>>> >     The Acquisitions Interest Group is requesting an Acquisitions
>>> >     specific listserv.  Currently Acquisitions falls under the
>>> >     Cataloguers list with the rest of technicial services.  During the
>>> >     Acquisitions Interest Group meeting at the Evergreen Conference
>>> this
>>> >     month the group discussed the need for an Acquisitions specific
>>> >     listserv to facilitate AIG activity. We are anticipating an
>>> >     increased amount of Acquisitions specific discussions during the
>>> >     Angularization of the Acquisitions module in the web client.
>>> >
>>> >     This topic is open for discussion please voice your opinion by
>>> >     *Friday May 5th*.
>>> >
>>> >     A copy of the meeting minutes can be found on the Acquisitions
>>> >     Interest Group wiki page here -
>>> >     https://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=acq:interest-group
>>> >     <https://wiki.evergreen-ils.org/doku.php?id=acq:interest-group>
>>> >
>>> >     Thank you
>>> >     Christine
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     --
>>> >     Christine Burns
>>> >     Co-op Support
>>> >     BC Libraries Cooperative
>>> >     Ph: 1-888-848-9250 <tel:(888)%20848-9250>
>>> >     https://bc.libraries.coop
>>> >     https://status.libraries.coop/
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Kathy Lussier
> Project Coordinator
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative(508) 343-0128klussier at masslnc.org
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20170427/b40436bb/attachment-0001.html>