Kyle's reply to your message reminds me if an important truth which I learned a few years ago- no software app or system (open source or proprietary) will succeed in this world without an open and active support community made up of users and developers. How many people actually pay Microsoft for technical support these days? Instead, when one has a problem, they search or ask a forum of users and developers for a solution.
If software does not offer such a community to my project (even if it offers every feature under the sun and is bug free), then I do not consider it. Thanks to Terry Reese's advice, I will always look at the interoperability of software and protocols as well (I think that healthy support communities and interoperability almost always come hand-in-hand though).
Uintah County Library
On June 7, 2017 10:46:54 AM MDT, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Most libraries (including every one I've worked at) create a list of
>required, preferred, and optional requirements. The basic idea is you
>a grid and check off which of those requirements is supported and move
>forward from there.
>However, the devil is in the details and the meaning of the word
>is so slippery as to be virtually meaningless in both the open source
>proprietary spheres. Even in a perfect world where all software bugs
>gone extinct, support for standards, functions, technologies, and
>is inevitably based on assumptions of needs which in turn presume
>like workflows, data, etc. -- so it is common to find yourself where a
>product can legitimately claim to support exactly what you need and be
>totally useless even before you consider whether the product is a good
>for your environment. Conversely, the mechanisms through which a
>behaves may be able to easily achieve what you need even though it
>theoretically doesn't support it at all.
>The most important thing is to understand what you need and the
>by which various products can meet those needs. I personally feel there
>no substitute for talking directly to people with intimate
>your needs who can provide a balanced picture of how a product might
>On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Paige Walker
><[log in to unmask]>
>> Dear collective wisdom,
>> The Digital Library Program at Boston College is investigating new
>> collections repositories as we plan to replace our current one
>> in the next year. The last time we surveyed the field, we were
>> primarily at proprietary platforms, which was reflected in our
>> To those who have considered open-source models, I’m wondering how
>> reflected in your functional requirements?
>> Thanks in advance,
>> PS: Sorry for cross-posting!
>> Paige Walker
>> Digital Collections & Preservation Librarian
>> Boston College
>> [log in to unmask]