Open-Source ILS Panel
Karen Schneider, Equinox Software, Inc (support software for Evergreen)
Andrew Nagy, VuFind
Tim McGeary, Lehigh University
Karen Schneider:
Explains a bit about Equinox - founded by the original developers of Evergreen; sells support for Evergreen. They make money through data migration, support contracts, but NOT licensing.
Some libraries run Evergreen on their own, with no support contract, but others run Evergreen with one of a number of levels of support. Some run Evergreen 100% hosted with Equinox.
More flexible than proprietary software - code is out in the open, no NDAs, no waiting on new development for the "latest release". They are starting to see "bounties" - an Evergreen site posts a message that they want a specific functionality and would anyone be willing to work on it with them.
Stresses don't have to get involved in open-source software development to benefit from the creativity and open environment of the software - don't have to touch Evergreen code to use Evergreen as your ILS.
Tim McGeary:
Member of OLE project group.
OLE goal is to turn ILS into service-oriented software. Thinking about business workflows in libraries; breaking ILS into components that can be constructed and then reused as things change. The example of service-oriented architecture given in the OLE Project workshop I attended at KU was of Legos - modular pieces that could be assembled in an infinite number of ways, depending on needs of builder.
Andrew Nagy:
Vu-Find is not an ILS, but an open-source OPAC overlay.
Open-source software is not a traditional product, because have access to the source code and can do what you want with it. Can choose to upgrade or not; apply parts of upgrades, etc. When applying open-source products, don't just look at what it can do right now. Must look at goals of project, project's longevity, etc, rather than what it can do right now. If you want something different, but the goals align with your own, you're able to build the new thing you want yourself or contract with a software company to build it for you. In other words, don't assume that because the project doesn't have the functionality that you want/need, you shouldn't consider adopting the project.
Question period:
Question about the assumption that open-source software is cheaper than proprietary software.
Karen reworked this a bit, saying that open-source can be cheaper, but doesn't necessarily have to be. What it is is a smarter expenditure of resources because you're not being locked in to something that you have to pay to get out of. Tim pointed out that one of OLE's goals is to allow the software to hook up with other enterprise software on campus, so that, for instance, patron authentication happens at the university level and doesn't have to be duplicated at the library level - so it's a savings in efficiency.
Question about proprietary nature of data that's going in to these systems - examples are OCLC's new proprietary treatment of MARC records, LibraryThing's acquisition by ProQuest. Andrew answered in a collective bargaining sense - the more libraries that participate in these projects, the more muscle OLE (for instance) has in talking to OCLC about their expectations for the data that will be coming in to the system.
Question about adaptability of open-source systems in working with proprietary systems like ERMs. .All three table participants discussed answers, but the definitive conclusion was that libraries seem to want the ERM to go away and its functionality be incorporated into the ILS.
Question about what Vu-Find can overlay. Andrew described it as a discovery interface that is designed to overlay any discovery tool - so could make a unified interface for OPAC, consortial catalogs, fed search, unified index, or whatever you have.
Presenters attempted to address lingering fears about open-source, including "things you've heard your director say."
"Once you customize, you can't apply any upgrades." Karen pointed out that the best way to participate in open-source is to participate in the community, so that what you customize gets pulled in to the center of the project and becomes part of an upgrade.
"We can't implement Evergreen because it's for public libraries." Karen pointed out that Evergreen was built to bring together over 200 public libraries, so the muscle for processing volume of records is there, and the belief of academic libraries is overblown that their needs are different from those of public libraries.
Discussion of why OLE project didn't get involved with Evergreen from the beginning - why they started over. Tim talked about OLE's perception that they needed to change the workflow and philosophy of the ILS, but that in software design, they may wind up using all or part of the Evergreen project.
Karen: Acquisitions, Serials, Reserves modules are on the table for Evergreen 2.0, which is this year's work. Says that in 2010, expect a "fulfillment" module that works for ILL. Pointed out several requirements lists that have been put out by Canadian libraries.
Calls the phenomenon that libraries fear open-source because it can't give them what they want "learned helplessness" because they've grown accustomed to opening the can of a proprietary system, not necessarily liking what's in the can, but using it anyway. The open-source mindset is very different - can-do and DIY - if you don't see the feature you want, you build it, contract for it to be built, or turn it over to the community for development. Be the makers of tools, not just consumers of tools.
All three panel members talked about the ability with open-source software (often) to download it to a single machine and playing with it to evaluate it. Also, since participants aren't "protected" or hidden by a vendor, it's very easy to contact other participants and find out what/how they're doing with the project.
Comments