[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] discouraged

Mon Mar 19 12:05:16 EDT 2018

Thank you! I will pass this on to our IT and cataloging departments.

Diane Disbro
Branch Manager/Circulation Coordinator
Union Branch
Scenic Regional Library
308 Hawthorne Drive
Union, MO     63084
(636) 583-3224

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Katie Greenleaf Martin <
bcl at blaircountylibraries.org> wrote:

> I have been able to use my Dymo 450 printer with the web client . . . I'm
> sure there are lots of use cases that may or may not be supported but here
> is my label template for just spine label (instead of spine and pocket)
> that works well for me. It did require some browser print settings
> tinkering :)
> Katie
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Diane Disbro <ddisbro at scenicregional.org
> > wrote:
>
>> Good morning -
>>
>> I appreciate hearing from several communities members their frustrations
>> and suggestions for using the web client.
>>
>> Showstoppers for me are:
>>
>>    - The inability to edit item attributes in the copy editor of more
>>    than one item at a time.
>>    - Losing settings and workstation registration after clearing the
>>    browser cache or restarting the computer.
>>    - The frequent need to clear the browser cache because of system
>>    freeze.
>>    - Several functions require being applied twice before the the
>>    function is performed.
>>    - Dymo printers aren't compatible with the web client.
>>
>> I chose the top five from my list of thirty-six.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Diane Disbro
>> Branch Manager/Circulation Coordinator
>> Union Branch
>> Scenic Regional Library
>> 308 Hawthorne Drive
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> Union, MO     63084
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive+Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> (636) 583-3224
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Diane,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry to hear your frustration, but I can also empathize. While
>>> working on a recent project to sponsor more bug fixes for the web client, I
>>> also got discouraged as new bugs were reported, particularly when they were
>>> ones that would have made our priority list if we had known about them at
>>> the time we were selecting bugs to fix. To keep myself from getting
>>> discouraged, I found it helped to keep some things in mind.
>>>
>>> - Despite the current open bugs, the web client has come a long way just
>>> in the past year. Setting aside the addition of serials and offline, there
>>> has been a lot of bug fixing  over the last months. In many cases, the
>>> fixes have been for what I consider to be showstopper bugs. I continued to
>>> see this work even today  as I was going through my bug mail. It might be
>>> useful for the community to track statistics of how many web client bugs
>>> are getting fixed on a monthly basis to help us see the progress that's
>>> been done. Looking at the 3.0 point release notes is also a good way to see
>>> how much work has been done.
>>>
>>> - There were many people, including myself, who spent a lot of time
>>> testing the web client when the code was initially written, but, no matter
>>> how much testing was done, we knew that there are just some bugs that just
>>> won't be found until people start using it in production. This isn't unique
>>> to Evergreen or open-source software, but is something I've seen when using
>>> proprietary software as well. We tried to catch some of these bugs by
>>> having 2.12 available for trial use in production, but I don't think most
>>> sites really started using the web client heavily  until 3.0, which was
>>> just released in October. I would say the flurry of bug reporting since
>>> that time is an expected part of the process of eventually getting to a
>>> more stable web client. This is also why we are keeping the xul client
>>> around through the 3.1 release, because we knew it would take time to get
>>> the web client to where it needs to be for all Evergreen users to move to
>>> it.
>>>
>>> I still remember the early days of the Template Toolkit catalog. I was
>>> equally discouraged about bugs and missing features, but as more sites
>>> started using it, they made sure features important to them were fixed or
>>> added, and we now have a stable and feature rich public catalog.
>>>
>>> - I'm worried about stating this the wrong way, but we also have to
>>> remember the number of bugs we've learned to live with under the xul
>>> client. I'm not saying we should just learn to live with the web client
>>> bugs, but they certainly are more noticeable now because they are new.
>>> There are also several xul client bugs we were able to close out because
>>> they were fixed in the web client. The important thing is that the bugs are
>>> open and known. Evergreen sites can see where the problems are and
>>> ultimately choose to focus on addressing the ones most important to them.
>>>
>>> Having said all of this, I do think it's important that if there are
>>> showstopper bugs in the web client (not annoyances, but things that really
>>> prevent you from using the web client), we need to identify those to
>>> increase the likelihood that they will be fixed ahead of other bugs. For
>>> example, one of the groups I work with recently set the bug priority to
>>> High for a handful of bugs they considered to be showstoppers. Back in the
>>> Template Toolkit days, there was a tag we used in Launchpad that identified
>>> bugs we thought should be fixed before removing the old catalog from
>>> Evergreen. Maybe we could consider doing something similar for the web
>>> client.
>>>
>>> Kathy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/16/2018 03:27 PM, Diane Disbro wrote:
>>>
>>> Good afternoon -
>>>
>>> I volunteered to keep track of Webby problems for the Missouri Evergreen
>>> circulation committee. I am pretty discouraged. My library began using
>>> Webby in December but there were so many frustrations that we stopped after
>>> about a month. My spreadsheet of problems now has thirty-five issue on it.
>>> Every time a new bug report is sent out my heart sinks.
>>>  Diane Disbro
>>> Branch Manager/Circulation Coordinator
>>> Union Branch
>>> Scenic Regional Library
>>> 308 Hawthorne Drive
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive+%0D%0A+++++++++++++++++++++++++Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>> Union, MO     63084
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=308+Hawthorne+Drive+%0D%0A+++++++++++++++++++++++++Union,+MO+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+63084&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>> (636) 583-3224
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kathy Lussier
>>> Project Coordinator
>>> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative(508) 343-0128klussier at masslnc.org
>>> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Katie Greenleaf Martin, MLIS
> bcl at blaircountylibraries.org
> 814.946.0417x132 <(814)%20946-0417>
> County Coordinator
> Blair County Library System
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20180319/457105b1/attachment.html>