[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions Interest Group meeting minutes & request for dedicated Acquisitions Listserv
Kathy Lussier
klussier at masslnc.org
Thu Apr 27 11:19:16 EDT 2017
Ideally, a process would come before a new list, but given that this is
the third time in my memory that there has been discussion of an
acquisitions list, I have no objections.
Kathy
On 04/27/2017 10:58 AM, Leslie St. John wrote:
> 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 <http://www.georgialibraries.org>
> www.gapines.org <http://www.gapines.org>
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org
> <mailto: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
> <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
> <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
>> <mailto:rogan at EquinoxInitiative.org>
>>
>> web: http://EquinoxInitiative.org
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Tiffany Little
>> <tlittle at georgialibraries.org
>> <mailto: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 <tel:%28404%29%20235-7160>
>> tlittle at georgialibraries.org
>> <mailto:tlittle at georgialibraries.org>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Jason Stephenson
>> <jason at sigio.com <mailto: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 <tel:404.235.7128> Office
>> > 404.548.4241 <tel:404.548.4241> Cell
>> > 404.235.7201 <tel: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>
>> > <mailto:christine.burns at bc.lib
>> <mailto:christine.burns at bc.lib>raries.coop
>> <http://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>
>> >
>> <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:1-888-848-9250>
>> <tel:(888)%20848-9250>
>> > https://bc.libraries.coop
>> > https://status.libraries.coop/
>> <https://status.libraries.coop/>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Kathy Lussier
> Project Coordinator
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
> (508) 343-0128 <tel:%28508%29%20343-0128>
> klussier at masslnc.org <mailto:klussier at masslnc.org>
> Twitter:http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier <http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier>
>
--
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier 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/20170427/97f59d00/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Open-ils-general
mailing list