I appreciate your input Kyle, thanks. If your discovery strategy is
predicated on having your scholarly IR harvested and presented to the world
through a separate discovery tool and the vast bulk of your document views
are coming from Google and Google Scholar users, does this lessen the
'compelling experience' requirement? I take your point about a potential
Maintenance headache further down the road, but would like to think this
could be mitigated by appropriate design and planning.

Peter

PS: Anything I express here is purely my own sentiment.



On 10 Apr 2015 18:55, "Kyle Banerjee" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> There's a lot in this question, but just to get at one common practice that
> doesn't make sense at first glance (namely operating multiple repositories)
> -- that's because you need something that meets needs both at the ingest
> and use end.
>
> There is a case for consolidation, but what delivers a compelling
> experience for born digital documents, scanned texts, archival images,
> datasets (many different kinds of these), etc. is very different. Adapting
> a repository that does one of these things well to perform a completely
> different task really well often sets you up for maintenance headaches that
> are far worse than you'd have  with multiple repositories even if
> containerizing your solution or using the cloud makes life easier. BTW, I
> don't think the cloud helps that much with the lock in issue as the
> platform and the data supporting it are so interrelated.
>
> We're always looking at possibilities, but having just one repository is
> not a realistic course of action for us right now.
>
> kyle
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 4:12 AM, Peter Corrigan <
> [log in to unmask]
> > wrote:
>
> > I'm interested in hearing the views of this list on long-term strategy
> > concerning the software platform for Scholarly Open Access Institutional
> > Repositories. In particular, I'm interested in how systems like DSpace,
> > Eprints, etc. have facilities that are to a degree, provided by Fedora
> > based solutions, e.g. IslandScholar. Why operate two repositories? As
> > some of us migrate these systems to the cloud, is there a case for
> > consolidation to reduce duplication of effort and, in particular,
> > duplication of the substantial long-term costs involved.
> > Is it the case that we set strategy concerning the scholarly IR platform
> > circa 2008 and now cloud-migration provides an opportunity to escape
> > inertial lock-in. Alternatively, is it the case that only a dedicated
> > scholarly repository provides the features our users demand. Agree,
> > disagree? I'd be grateful for your input.
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Peter Corrigan
> >
> >
> > Peter Corrigan,
> > Head of Organisational Development & Performance,
> > James Hardiman Library,
> > National University of Ireland, Galway.
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
>