On 8/31/07, Tyson Tate <tysontate_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Why not pool resources indirectly by encouraging library-employed
> programmers to participate in the development of open source catalogs
> (of which there are a number of excellent ones being developed)? Do
> away with all the paperwork of the ever-proliferating committees and
> "task-forces" and just allow your programmer to spend 50% of his/her
> time contributing to open source catalog systems. Perhaps libraries
> could better afford qualified programmers if they didn't have to
> spend insane amounts of money on antiquated online catalog systems
> and support contracts.
It's a problem of perceived value. The library software world is a place
where you can sell more copies of a piece of software at 10 grand a pop than
you could at $10, and couldn't give away for free. It's Worthington's Law
("more money = better than") [1]. Commercial library software has a high
perceived value, and if it isn't pricy enough, it's assumed to be crap.
Library geeks generally have a low perceived value, and even in places where
that isn't the case, pretty much anything -- even something like beta
testing a commercial vendor's software for free -- is given higher priority
than working on open source projects. I don't know how to change that.
I would like to see a bounty/pledge board for open source library software.
Libraries could pledge monetary support or staff resources towards
particular projects or features. Pooling money together would attract more
interest from developers outside of libraries. which would be especially
beneficial for a project like Evergreen, which is written in programming
languages there's not a lot of library world expertise or interest in.
--Casey
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF8wLg5Asgo
Received on Fri Aug 31 2007 - 13:17:31 EDT