Taking matters<br />into our <br />own hands<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Influencing and concerning factors<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
For libraries that developed Open Source Software<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill<br />Special Services Librarian<br />Cottesloe-Peppermint Grove-Mosman Park Library<br />VALA  <br />Feb...
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Why would a library develop its own <br />Open Source <br />software ?<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com...
BEFORE<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
WRONG<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
2. What were the risks?<br />
3. What can libraries considering adopting Open Source software learn from this?<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
“Why did you do it and what did you worry about?”<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
John Blyberg<br />Joann Ransom and Chris Cormack<br />Karen Schneider<br />Ken Chad<br />Marshall Breeding<br />Brett Bonf...
Influencing factors<br />
Concerning factors<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Menu<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Licensing<br />Software studied<br />Methodology<br />Survey results<br />Interviews<br />Implications for adopting librar...
Licensing<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Open Source<br />Licensing type ?<br />Development Methodology ?<br />Religion ?<br />Threat to civilization as we know it...
Proprietary licence<br />Pay for licence<br />Number of users restricted<br />No access to Source Code<br />Modifications ...
About Open Source Licences<br />
1. Free Redistribution<br />2. Source Code<br />3. Derived Works<br />4. Integrity of The Author&apos;s Source Code<br />5...
Software studied<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Library Management Systems<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Map provided as a service of Library Technology Guides. Data from lib-web-cats. http://www.librarytechnology.org/map.pl?IL...
Discovery layers<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Software not yet developed<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Methodology<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Survey and interview<br />
6 developers<br />6 managers<br />6 specifiers<br />
Library Literature<br />
Influencing factors<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Concerning factors<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
How they answered<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
WRONG<br />
Most influential<br />
Most influential factors<br />1.More control of features <br />
Most influential factors<br />2.Existing software used by library does not meet needs<br />
Most influential factors<br />3. Easier to modify<br />
Most influential factors<br />4. You can make the system interoperable with others<br />
Most concerning<br />
Most concerning factors<br />Open Source Library Software may make the organisation too dependent on the staff member who ...
Most concerning factors<br />2. It may be hard to hire someone with the right skills to support Open Source Library Softwa...
Most concerning factors<br />3. Our library may not be able to afford staffing to support Open Source Library Software<br />
Most concerning factors<br />4. Total Cost of Ownership may be more or the same as proprietary software<br />
Not true<br />
Not true<br />Open Source cannot match the sophistication and fuctionality offered by proprietary software<br />50%<br />(...
Not true<br />2. It is easy to find malicious exploits if you can see all the code<br />28%<br />
Not true<br />3. The IT department is not used to supporting Open Source<br />28%<br />
Not true<br />4. Self-developed software costs less<br />22%<br />
Differences between groups<br />
What they said<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Why they did it<br />
Necessity<br />
People oftentimes asked us “Are you radical or just plain crazy?”. <br />
Well, actually the truth of the matter is that we were just plain desperate.<br />
Improvement<br />
Mission critical and budgeted<br />
Organisational Culture<br />
Developers’ role<br />
Librarians’ understanding of OSS<br />
“Narcissism of small differences”<br />
“It’s just a big database. How hard could it be?”<br />
“It’s the insane rules that go with the big database that make it hard...I’m yet to meet two libraries that do the same th...
“...everyone does their own special way of doing everything so it’s really hard to make a generalised solution”<br />
Vendor relationship<br />
Costs and benefits<br />
Community and Open Source<br />
Implications<br />if adopting OSS<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
1. Do not expect to save money<br />
2. Open up organisational culture<br />
3. Ensure adequate staffing<br />
4. Check community<br />
5. Check documentation<br />
6. Consider using a “magic box” approach<br />
7. Give proactive suggestions to developers, not reactive criticisms<br />
8. Re-assess inhouse procedures<br />
8. Re-assess inhouse procedures<br />
9. Look for the “Narcissism of Small Differences”<br />
10. Ensure staff understand what developers do and about the software development cycle<br />
Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
In<br />Our<br />Hands<br />Kathryn Greenhill  http://librariansmatter.com<br />
Media credits<br />Slide 1 Xava du, Magic is true!, July 2, 2008, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/7933170@N03/2631820...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Taking matters into our own hands: influencing factors and concerning factors for libraries that developed their own Open Source Software

1,906

Published on

Results of interviews and surveys with developers and managers who created the following Open Source library software:
* Scriblio
* SOPAC2
* VuFind
* Blacklight
* Koha
* Evergreen

Also interviewed are 6 people who helped specify the OLE project - Open Library Environment.

It compares benefits and barriers described in literature about Open Source library software with the opinions and experience of people who actually developed a product.

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,906
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Taking matters into our own hands: influencing factors and concerning factors for libraries that developed their own Open Source Software"

  1. 1. Taking matters<br />into our <br />own hands<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  2. 2. Influencing and concerning factors<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  3. 3. For libraries that developed Open Source Software<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  4. 4. Kathryn Greenhill<br />Special Services Librarian<br />Cottesloe-Peppermint Grove-Mosman Park Library<br />VALA <br />Feb 2010<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  5. 5. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  6. 6. Why would a library develop its own <br />Open Source <br />software ?<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  7. 7. BEFORE<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  8. 8. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  9. 9. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  10. 10. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  11. 11. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  12. 12. WRONG<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  13. 13. 2. What were the risks?<br />
  14. 14. 3. What can libraries considering adopting Open Source software learn from this?<br />
  15. 15. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  16. 16. “Why did you do it and what did you worry about?”<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  17. 17. John Blyberg<br />Joann Ransom and Chris Cormack<br />Karen Schneider<br />Ken Chad<br />Marshall Breeding<br />Brett Bonfield<br />CaseyBisson<br />SukhwinderRandhawa<br />Robert Molyneux<br />Dale Askey<br />Eric Lease Morgan<br />Nicole Engard<br />Scott Colford<br />Ian Witten<br />
  18. 18. Influencing factors<br />
  19. 19. Concerning factors<br />
  20. 20.
  21. 21. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  22. 22. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  23. 23. Menu<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  24. 24. Licensing<br />Software studied<br />Methodology<br />Survey results<br />Interviews<br />Implications for adopting libraries<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  25. 25. Licensing<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  26. 26. Open Source<br />Licensing type ?<br />Development Methodology ?<br />Religion ?<br />Threat to civilization as we know it ?<br />No-cost ?<br />Inferior ?<br />Wrong term ?<br />
  27. 27. Proprietary licence<br />Pay for licence<br />Number of users restricted<br />No access to Source Code<br />Modifications by company based on priorities not determined by individual customer<br />
  28. 28. About Open Source Licences<br />
  29. 29.
  30. 30. 1. Free Redistribution<br />2. Source Code<br />3. Derived Works<br />4. Integrity of The Author&apos;s Source Code<br />5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups<br />6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavour<br />7. Distribution of License<br />8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product<br />9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software<br />10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral<br />
  31. 31. Software studied<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  32. 32. Library Management Systems<br />
  33. 33.
  34. 34. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  35. 35.
  36. 36. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  37. 37. Map provided as a service of Library Technology Guides. Data from lib-web-cats. http://www.librarytechnology.org/map.pl?ILS=Koha. Marshall Breeding (accessed 1 February 2010)<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  38. 38. Discovery layers<br />
  39. 39.
  40. 40. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  41. 41.
  42. 42. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  43. 43.
  44. 44. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
  47. 47. Software not yet developed<br />
  48. 48.
  49. 49. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  50. 50. Methodology<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  51. 51. Survey and interview<br />
  52. 52. 6 developers<br />6 managers<br />6 specifiers<br />
  53. 53. Library Literature<br />
  54. 54. Influencing factors<br />
  55. 55. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  56. 56. Concerning factors<br />
  57. 57. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  58. 58. How they answered<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  59. 59.
  60. 60. WRONG<br />
  61. 61. Most influential<br />
  62. 62. Most influential factors<br />1.More control of features <br />
  63. 63. Most influential factors<br />2.Existing software used by library does not meet needs<br />
  64. 64. Most influential factors<br />3. Easier to modify<br />
  65. 65. Most influential factors<br />4. You can make the system interoperable with others<br />
  66. 66. Most concerning<br />
  67. 67. Most concerning factors<br />Open Source Library Software may make the organisation too dependent on the staff member who knows most about it<br />
  68. 68. Most concerning factors<br />2. It may be hard to hire someone with the right skills to support Open Source Library Software<br />
  69. 69. Most concerning factors<br />3. Our library may not be able to afford staffing to support Open Source Library Software<br />
  70. 70. Most concerning factors<br />4. Total Cost of Ownership may be more or the same as proprietary software<br />
  71. 71. Not true<br />
  72. 72. Not true<br />Open Source cannot match the sophistication and fuctionality offered by proprietary software<br />50%<br />(5/6 developers)<br />
  73. 73. Not true<br />2. It is easy to find malicious exploits if you can see all the code<br />28%<br />
  74. 74. Not true<br />3. The IT department is not used to supporting Open Source<br />28%<br />
  75. 75. Not true<br />4. Self-developed software costs less<br />22%<br />
  76. 76. Differences between groups<br />
  77. 77. What they said<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  78. 78. Why they did it<br />
  79. 79. Necessity<br />
  80. 80. People oftentimes asked us “Are you radical or just plain crazy?”. <br />
  81. 81. Well, actually the truth of the matter is that we were just plain desperate.<br />
  82. 82. Improvement<br />
  83. 83. Mission critical and budgeted<br />
  84. 84. Organisational Culture<br />
  85. 85. Developers’ role<br />
  86. 86. Librarians’ understanding of OSS<br />
  87. 87. “Narcissism of small differences”<br />
  88. 88. “It’s just a big database. How hard could it be?”<br />
  89. 89. “It’s the insane rules that go with the big database that make it hard...I’m yet to meet two libraries that do the same thing...”<br />
  90. 90. “...everyone does their own special way of doing everything so it’s really hard to make a generalised solution”<br />
  91. 91. Vendor relationship<br />
  92. 92. Costs and benefits<br />
  93. 93. Community and Open Source<br />
  94. 94. Implications<br />if adopting OSS<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  95. 95. 1. Do not expect to save money<br />
  96. 96. 2. Open up organisational culture<br />
  97. 97. 3. Ensure adequate staffing<br />
  98. 98. 4. Check community<br />
  99. 99. 5. Check documentation<br />
  100. 100. 6. Consider using a “magic box” approach<br />
  101. 101. 7. Give proactive suggestions to developers, not reactive criticisms<br />
  102. 102. 8. Re-assess inhouse procedures<br />
  103. 103. 8. Re-assess inhouse procedures<br />
  104. 104. 9. Look for the “Narcissism of Small Differences”<br />
  105. 105. 10. Ensure staff understand what developers do and about the software development cycle<br />
  106. 106. Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  107. 107. In<br />Our<br />Hands<br />Kathryn Greenhill http://librariansmatter.com<br />
  108. 108. Media credits<br />Slide 1 Xava du, Magic is true!, July 2, 2008, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/7933170@N03/2631820657/<br />Slide 5 Else Maria Tennessen, Patti - side, September 7, 2007, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/else10/1347238115/. <br />Slide 8 Stephen Poff, October 6th 2008 - Rock &apos;N&apos; Roll Ain&apos;t Pretty, October 6, 2008, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenpoff/2920198159/.<br /> <br />Slide 9 Alberto Avramidis, Money, it&apos;s a crime, August 7, 2007, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/kiki99/1062744637/.<br /> <br />Slide 10 Ming Xia, No vendors, December 24, 2005, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/xiaming/76830735/.<br /> <br />Slide 15 Michael Sauers, Paul & Kathryn, March 30, 2009, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/travelinlibrarian/3424177350/<br />Slide 57 Marjie Kennedy, what happened here?, October 30, 2009, Flickr, http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbk/4059804437/<br />

×